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.

Da Boss wrote:Goliath: The microwave emitter thing was hilariously unrealistic. It doesn't bother me though- Batman is a kind of Sci Fi.

Oh yeah, I'd forgotten about that one.

Bane looks cool as hell

Seems like there might be ~politics~ in this one which I'm dubious about, because politics aren't really what i want out of a movie about a dude who dresses up like a bat and fights supervillains, but I'll reserve judgement there till I know more about it.

I need to change my pants. I love Nolan's Batman seriously when I was playing Arkum Asylum I would be constantly quoting the Bale Bat even down to that silly voice.

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:Bane looks cool as hell

Seems like there might be ~politics~ in this one which I'm dubious about, because politics aren't really what i want out of a movie about a dude who dresses up like a bat and fights supervillains, but I'll reserve judgement there till I know more about it.

maybe you hadn't noticed, but their are politics in all of them so far.

Easy E wrote:

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:Bane looks cool as hell

Seems like there might be ~politics~ in this one which I'm dubious about, because politics aren't really what i want out of a movie about a dude who dresses up like a bat and fights supervillains, but I'll reserve judgement there till I know more about it.

maybe you hadn't noticed, but their are politics in all of them so far.

Indeed. In Begins Ra's points out how they used economics to try and bring Gotham down but that a handful of wealthy people, including his parents kept it from reaching a boiling point. Of course before he disappeared, Rachael took Bruce down under the bridge to show how the elite hadn't been taking the role of leadership and letting things go to hell. TDK pitted the heroes against the mob mentality to seek safety in turning Batman over to the Joker. I'm simplifying this a bit of course, but both films dealt with unbalanced (psychologically or economically) society. It seems like Bane may be following in Ra's footsteps but ratcheting it up by trying to make class warfare literal. Why? Maybe he is working with the LoS, a radical offshoot, or something else entirely.

The script was also written long before the Occupy Wall Street existed.

Batman (and a lot of DC comics) has always had an overarching theme of noblesse oblige. The rich and powerful have both an obligation and the authority to protect us, particularly when our government based on self-rule lets someone go unpunished. Because in the world of comics good and evil are black & white. And if the bad guys get away, it's a failure in the system that someone needs to correct.

I don't have a problem with that message being presented per se. My problem with this movie is rebranding Catwoman to fill a role that apparently doesn't exist among the traditional Batman villains. Poison Ivy is probably the closest I can imagine (radical environmentalism/anti-development) to the anti-capitalist view Catwoman appears to be espousing.

What is he saying at 1.14 when he steps into that odd prison like building?

Also, who is that at 1.43/1.44? Seems a bit odd to show a random man facing the camera...

Easy E wrote:maybe you hadn't noticed, but their are politics in all of them so far.

Not heavy-handedly and not really as a focus, and it's "there are".

Like, neither of the others seemed to want to bring up political issues for debate, and I get the impression this one does. I could be wrong.

Ahtman wrote:

gorgon wrote:Whew...glad Hines survived.

Saw someone mention this on Youtube...sounded crazy to me, but then...

Spoiler:

At 0:12 or so, there's a shot of fans holding letters spelling "ROGUES," the Gotham football team. The "R" looks a lot like Robin's symbol. I don't think it could be an accident...the swooshy top is the same and the leg is pointy, just like the Robin logo. Is that just a little wink to fans, or does that mean we might actually see Robin or at least Dick Grayson?

That is the "R" from Robin, though I imagine that is the only reference we will get as Nolan and Bale have both been pretty vocal about Robin not being a part of this version of Batman. IF you liked that, you'll love this:
[/spoiler]

Looks like we've got an update on the Robin "R". Blame an extra it seems. It was completely unintentional on Nolan's part.

Dark Knight Rises Robin Reference of the Day: There’s a Robin logo hidden in the latest trailer for Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight Rises, but it wasn’t put there by Nolan, who has said the Boy Wonder won’t be in the movie.

The culprit appears to be a clever extra playing a Gotham Rogues fan in the football stadium scene. Extras were encouraged to bring their own signs, and one of them decided to make the “R” in Rogues look just like Robin’s “R.”

So, don’t get your hopes up that Robin will make an appearance in Rises.

According to Empire magazine, “This is no more a ‘clue’ that Robin will be in the film than the presence of the Batman logo on a door during Following was a ‘clue’ that Nolan would one day make a Batman movie.”

Also, FWIW it appears Nolan is aware of the audio "issues" with Bane but is not going to completely change the sound mix like WB want him to. more on it here: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/dark-knight-rises-christian-bale-batman-tom-hardy-bane-275489

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:

Easy E wrote:maybe you hadn't noticed, but their are politics in all of them so far.

Not heavy-handedly and not really as a focus, and it's "there are".

Like, neither of the others seemed to want to bring up political issues for debate, and I get the impression this one does. I could be wrong.

I think the Dark Knight had some pretty heavy handed politic messages about unwarrented surveillance, and the need for a "guardian figure" to do extralegal things to the bad people so that the "decent people" wouldn't have to.

Considering that this was during the time of the Patriot Act, Warrantless Wiretapping, Telecomm Immunity, Rendition, and Torture debates; I would say it was a pretty in your face political message.

I've just twigged who bane reminds of in this, Hannibal lecter.

This is not a bad thing at all...

I'm not overly impressed with this preview, but given the track record I'll trust Nolan not to have Schumaker'd the franchise.

Easy E wrote:I think the Dark Knight had some pretty heavy handed politic messages about unwarrented surveillance, and the need for a "guardian figure" to do extralegal things to the bad people so that the "decent people" wouldn't have to.

At the same time though it also raises the issue that Batman's presence is also an instigator for criminal shenanigans; as each side becomes more lawless the more dangerous the other becomes. Gordon pretty much calls Batman out at the end of Begins, and Alfred points it out in the TDK as well.

some random guy from a different forum wrote:Having said that, Dent was still too good for the insanely corrupt Gotham. He wanted to clean up the city but was met with police corruption, a deeply entrenched mobster underworld, and assassination attempts on his life; all followed up by the Joker and his successful assassinations of judges and police officers. Dent and Batman take actions that they think will correct this corruption and exercise their own demons and allow Gotham (and themselves) to lead normal and safe lives, but they're just feeding the beast because their own corruption and willingness to supersede the law via vigilantism is part of the problem.
But, the corruption doesn't just stop at them, look at how many of Gotham's own citizens tried to assassinate the whistle blower: they were willing to sacrifice an innocent man due to a terrorist threat. Gordon's statement is correct: the city let their laws and enforcement bodies become corrupt to the point of uselessness against organized crime and allowing a masked vigilante to do their job. They got lazy and weren't willing to change their ways and gave complete agency to a madman in a batsuit, which unfortunately led to changes for the worse; hence Batman's exile, the death of Dent and DAWES, and the advent of more supervillainy

biccat wrote:I'll still probably go see it, despite the fact that I think Bane is a terrible villain.

This is twice in a day I've agreed with you. It must be a Christmas miracle.

Out of all the fascinating Batman villains, Bane is easily the lamest, in my opinion. But we'll see what Nolan can do with him.

Bane's lookin' pretty hip in that jacket!

But seriously, it looks like it's gonna be great, just like the last two.

Ahtman wrote:

Easy E wrote:I think the Dark Knight had some pretty heavy handed politic messages about unwarrented surveillance, and the need for a "guardian figure" to do extralegal things to the bad people so that the "decent people" wouldn't have to.

At the same time though it also raises the issue that Batman's presence is also an instigator for criminal shenanigans; as each side becomes more lawless the more dangerous the other becomes. Gordon pretty much calls Batman out at the end of Begins, and Alfred points it out in the TDK as well.

some random guy from a different forum wrote:Having said that, Dent was still too good for the insanely corrupt Gotham. He wanted to clean up the city but was met with police corruption, a deeply entrenched mobster underworld, and assassination attempts on his life; all followed up by the Joker and his successful assassinations of judges and police officers. Dent and Batman take actions that they think will correct this corruption and exercise their own demons and allow Gotham (and themselves) to lead normal and safe lives, but they're just feeding the beast because their own corruption and willingness to supersede the law via vigilantism is part of the problem.
But, the corruption doesn't just stop at them, look at how many of Gotham's own citizens tried to assassinate the whistle blower: they were willing to sacrifice an innocent man due to a terrorist threat. Gordon's statement is correct: the city let their laws and enforcement bodies become corrupt to the point of uselessness against organized crime and allowing a masked vigilante to do their job. They got lazy and weren't willing to change their ways and gave complete agency to a madman in a batsuit, which unfortunately led to changes for the worse; hence Batman's exile, the death of Dent and DAWES, and the advent of more supervillainy

Which is why I love this series. It works on so many levels, and is dripping with subtexts to analyze.

From the preview, i think it will give us more great subtext!

Ouze wrote:

biccat wrote:I'll still probably go see it, despite the fact that I think Bane is a terrible villain.

This is twice in a day I've agreed with you. It must be a Christmas miracle.

Out of all the fascinating Batman villains, Bane is easily the lamest, in my opinion. But we'll see what Nolan can do with him.

I have the exact same opinion. Bane sucks, but "The Dark Knight" was a great film so I'll still wait this.

I honestly think Bane would make a great villain totally different form the joker and scarecrow which is what I want.

Cheesecat wrote:I honestly think Bane would make a great villain totally different form the joker and scarecrow which is what I want.

This, having a villain that is a physical match for batman is quite refreshing.

corpsesarefun wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:I honestly think Bane would make a great villain totally different form the joker and scarecrow which is what I want.

This, having a villain that is a physical match for batman is quite refreshing.

I wonder if Bane is going to have horror elements to him like the other villains (scarecrows hallucinations and joker's insanity), I hope he does because fear has been an important part of Nolan's Batman

villains.

biccat wrote:I don't have a problem with that message being presented per se. My problem with this movie is rebranding Catwoman to fill a role that apparently doesn't exist among the traditional Batman villains. Poison Ivy is probably the closest I can imagine (radical environmentalism/anti-development) to the anti-capitalist view Catwoman appears to be espousing.

She's an opportunist. $10 says she's mouthing the lines the people she's working for/with want her to, but doesn't care for the cause herself, except maybe as a convenient justification for her thefts.

Da Boss wrote:Goliath: The microwave emitter thing was hilariously unrealistic. It doesn't bother me though- Batman is a kind of Sci Fi.

And also completely stupid. How do you fire microwaves across a city to turn all the water to gas, and not kill all the people its hitting, given they're 70% water?!

I mean, yeah, Batman has always had sci-fi moments and that's certainly the case in Nolan's Batman series. But there's a difference between unrealistic and camp. The idea of a hover batmobile is camp, and that really doesn't belong in Nolan's Batman.

That said, it certainly won't keep me away. Nolan has a great track record, not just in his Batman films but across all his work. I'm willing to back the guy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

A Kvlt Ghost wrote:Bane looks cool as hell

Seems like there might be ~politics~ in this one which I'm dubious about, because politics aren't really what i want out of a movie about a dude who dresses up like a bat and fights supervillains, but I'll reserve judgement there till I know more about it.

As has already been pointed out, there's been politics in both Batman films so far. Thing is though, it's only ever touched on the issue, and not just smashed an answer in our faces, so it hasn't been a problem.

I mean, think of the sonar thing in The Dark Knight. Fox has a big problem with it, and tells Batman as much, saying that much power shouldn't be in the hands of one person. Parallels to the information gathering powers of the Patriot Act were clear, and in the wake of the film people read all kinds of stuff into it. Thing was, though, some folk saw fit to see the film as a condemnation of the Patriot Act, others thought Nolan was telling then president Bush was Batman. When people see both sides of the argument in the issue you've raised, odds are you've done your job as a film maker to raise the issue, but not shout a conclusion at us.

While there's every reason we'll see politics in this film too, there's every reason to believe the issues will merely be touched on, allowing us to draw our own conclusions.

Cheesecat wrote:I need to change my pants. I love Nolan's Batman seriously when I was playing Arkum Asylum I would be constantly quoting the Bale Bat even down to that silly voice.

Oh you mean saying things like "I dont wear hockey pads" but in that really squirrly voice he does Thats my personal fav, I honestly use that as an answer to certain slowed questions I will randomly be asked.
"Hey did you know your out of milk?"
*scratchy semi deep voice*
I dun ware hockey pades!

The trailer was largely underwhelming. If the '100 yard down' (Thank you, here all week) sequence is meant as a showpiece i worry. I really am puzzled over how anyone could find this trailer really exciting.

Well apart from fanboy-ism

Judging from the trailer Bane is meant to EDIT not be a straight villain but an idealist with questionable methods EDIT . I am guessing he hides his face because he too is a billionaire/recognisable figure. I remember hearing somewhere that most depictions of bane are super geniuses not just hulking brutes. Still disappointed he doesn't hulk out, Bane clealry isnt above killing so shedding some of his humanity (read: pumping himself with rage steroids) would reinforce what i assume the character is meant to be.

Also, the line you quote in the OP is unintelligible. Both the diegetic and non-diegetic noise cloud it as does the general Mumbling. Plus i've Wathced it twice and still dont know what michael caine is saying in the escher zone. Really big fail for a trailer.

I had problems with the dialogue (see above, if anyone can help out with that they get an internet dollar), but not for the ones you describe.

I think Bane is pretty clear.

As for M. Caine? He never has anything interesting to say. I found his casting as Alfred to be... poor. Cockney is in no way posh/eloquent

Perkustin wrote:I really am puzzled over how anyone could find this trailer really exciting.

I am puzzled by how anyone couldn't find the trailer exciting. Not foaming at the mouth, fanboy excited, but excited nevertheless.

Perkustin wrote:Judging from the trailer Bane is meant to EDIT not be a straight villain but an idealist with questionable methods EDIT .

So Darth Vader, Ozymandius, or Ra's Al Ghul aren't villains anymore?

Perkustin wrote:I am guessing he hides his face because he too is a billionaire/recognisable figure.

The mask isn't really a mask but a breathing apparatus. He wears it becuase he has to.

Perkustin wrote:I remember hearing somewhere that most depictions of bane are super geniuses not just hulking brutes.

The only time he was depicted as a hulking brute and not intelligent was in Batman and Robin where he was a plant man played by a wrestler.

Perkustin wrote:Still disappointed he doesn't hulk out, Bane clealry isnt above killing so shedding some of his humanity (read: pumping himself with rage steroids) would reinforce what i assume the character is meant to be.

I'm ok with him being a badass that can beat Batman down in a straight up fight without having a magic elixir that makes him double or triple his muscle mass in 5 seconds.

Perkustin wrote:Also, the line you quote in the OP is unintelligible.

Which line? "In the spring the mayor is going to dump him" or "when Gotham is ashes you have my permission to die".?

Perkustin wrote:Plus i've Wathced it twice and still dont know what michael caine is saying in the escher zone.

No one says anything, there is chanting and Wayne says "What does that mean?" and the purposefully obfuscated man behind him, who I don't think is Alfred, responds "rise". If it is a set it is based on a real place in India called Chand Baori, or it was actually shot there.

Gotta say that I'm glad that their doing Bane right, as in Knight Fall right where he was a legitimate and amazing villain. Bane wasn't supposed to be just some meathead, but rather a genius with an enhanced physical form. Hell, in Knight Fall he deduces that Batman is Bruce Wayne and ambushes him in his own home.

Also with Christopher Nolan, I doubt this film can go wrong, his worst film was probably Insomnia, and that wasn't bad at all.

All in all, I am looking forward to this finale and expect good things out of this. And c'mon, "When Gotham has burned to ash, you have my permission to die," how badass is that?

Medium of Death wrote:Also, who is that at 1.43/1.44? Seems a bit odd to show a random man facing the camera...

Well the actor is Joseph Gordon Levitt, but I expect you knew that (this film is basically one big Inception reunion). He's playing John Blake, one of Gordon's "good" cops.

Medium of Death wrote:As for M. Caine? He never has anything interesting to say. I found his casting as Alfred to be... poor. Cockney is in no way posh/eloquent

Seriously? I loved his line in the trailer and even if you don't like that, I can't believe you don't get a kick out of his, "Some men just want to watch the world burn." speech in the Dark Knight. To be honest, I'm such a fan of Michael Caine in these films, I dont think we're going to find middle ground here

Nolan reuses actors a lot, there were many actors from inception in batman begins too.

Ouze wrote:

biccat wrote:I'll still probably go see it, despite the fact that I think Bane is a terrible villain.

This is twice in a day I've agreed with you. It must be a Christmas miracle.

Out of all the fascinating Batman villains, Bane is easily the lamest, in my opinion. But we'll see what Nolan can do with him.

Not me. I was not impressed by this. The reviews will have to be awesome before I spend my money.