214 replies to this topic

[Gabe]

I think it's fair to make another Batman reboot, but they just gotta wait longer. 7 years minimum. Just as Batman Begins was made for a different audience than Burton's Batman,

Er, not really. Burton's Batman and Batman returns were both going for a dark, gritty approach, as explained by Sam Hamm:

they hear Tim Burton's name and they think of Pee-wee's Big Adventure. They hear Keaton's name and they think of any number of Michael Keaton comedies. You think of the 1960s version of Batman, and it was the complete opposite of our film. We tried to market it with a typical dark and serious tone, but the fans didn't believe us.

The latter however went for arguably a way too dark approach, resulting in moral guardians throwing a hissy fit over it. Add to that the significantly lower box office intake, and as a result Warner Bros. booted off Burton and replaced him with Joel Shumacher, who gave us the more kid-friendly/campy Batman Forever and Batman & Robin (which I will assume you were referring to).

Anyway, I saw the film tonight, and I thought it was fantastic. I haven't seen all of Batman Begins, but I have seen The Dark Knight many times, and in comparison with that film...hard for me to say which was better, I'd put them on par, although if I had to choose between the two, I will say that TDK definitely trumps TDKR just based on Heath Ledger's Joker alone. Hell, it's gonna be hard for any Batman film made after it to beat or even match his performance (although I think Hardy did a pretty good job as Bane). Such a shame he died, I heard that an early script of the film was originally going to have him on trial in the beginning of the film (but of course Actor Existence Failure, and there was pretty much no way they were going to replace him with someone else), and I will admit that his absense in the film did make the film a bit empty. It didn't help that I don't think an indirect reference to him was even made, and I still think it would had been nice if at least one mention of him would had at least have been nice. Spoilers about film details below in the rest of my writeup, with replies to some of the previous posts. The overall post is also long as heck.

Spoiler

If it's one thing I do love about TDKR's it's Bane's and Talia's big grand scheme. The sheer scope of it I thought was rather interesting. Speaking of Talia, I wan't expecting her to be revealed as the Bigger Bad of the story. The entire climax I definitely think is the best part of the entire film, and the ending I thought was quite well-done. I'm also going to note that I didn't recall seeing Bane arrested. Then I remembered that he was shot by Catwoman, so it's possible that he was killed (the beating he recieved from Batman as well as the damages from his mask (that Talia partially repaired...somewhat?) didn't help. Then again, maybe he somehow survived and avoided escape. But this is the last film in the Nolan trilogy, so I guess that's going to be left for viewers to decide.

The only thing about the film that bothers/gets a negative remark from me is how Bruce/Batman was somehow able to survive a nuclear explosion (inb4 HE'S THE GODDAMN BATMAN, THAT'S HOW). I know it doesn't exactly show how he escaped to make it ambiguous, like Bane's fate (I had two assumptions-the Bat Aircraft is somehow nuclear-proof or he at some point -presumably within the last minute to go- dropped it into the sea and then left the scene at super-high speeds....), but it's still somewhat strange to me. Otherwise I thought the overall conclusion was well-done for me.

Selina Kyle's arse is the best thing in this movie... especially when she humps the bat-bike... yes I did spot that you naughty girl =p

This is the greatest and most agreeable quote/thought I've seen in a while. If you don't mind Hogfather, this is going in my signature.

One thing I'm surprised hasn't been brought up was the general scale of the movie. Man, did this movie feel big. So much stuff was happening and so many of the scenes felt really intense that it really gave the story an epic sort of scale. The big face-off in the streets between the two armies is a great example of this.

As I mentioned above, I thought this was the absolute best part of the film, along with the great acting and the impressive score (although I still think the Nokia trailer version of Gotham's Reckoning is much superior than the original score in the OST).

Bane's escape is pretty cool in the plane sequence but at times it was almost impossible to understand what Bane (Tom Hardy) was saying with that FUCKING mask on his face. You really had to listen hard to understand him at times.

I ran into this problem as well, although I would blame the loudness of Bane's voice after Nolan tweaked it when the original voice came under much scruitiny by fans.

LOL NOLAN. I see what he did there with the "Final Batman Movie". XD

He said Final BATMAN movie, that doesn't necessarily mean the franchise. Since we saw Robin (I don't think it was the first Robin, weird?) jumping around at the last part of the film....

That actually is a pretty interesting thought you have there, lol. But I highly doubt it. I don't get why people are even assuming John Blake is going to become Robin. I've did a quick check, and apparently Blake isn't any of the people who became Robin (either as an official or alternative version). Also, it's not like Bruce left a Robin suit for him or anything (I'm pretty sure that would had been shown at the end of the film). Not to mention that it isn't shown that Bruce even trained him at some point, so we don't even know if he even becomes Batman.

Edited by Zinos, 28 July 2012 - 12:27 PM.

[Deaf Guy in Music Plant]

A guy from SHH suggested what I think is a really great idea to introduce Batman into the JL movie build-up:

World's Finest. So you wanna reboot Batman so he can appear in Justice League? Just team him up with Superman. That way you don't have to reinvent he Batman movie template in the wake of the Dark Knight trilogy, instead just cut right to something we've definitely never seen before but always wanted to.

[Metal Gear (sting)RAY]

Er, not really. Burton's Batman and Batman returns were both going for a dark, gritty approach, as explained by Sam Hamm:

The latter however went for arguably a way too dark approach, resulting in moral guardians throwing a hissy fit over it. Add to that the significantly lower box office intake, and as a result Warner Bros. booted off Burton and replaced him with Joel Shumacher, who gave us the more kid-friendly/campy Batman Forever and Batman & Robin (which I will assume you were referring to).

Shumacher's irrelevant. I said Burton's Batman and I meant BURTON's Batman. Just because they shared some motifs doesn't mean they aren't ultimately building upon different themes. It's like comparing the Night of the Living Dead to 28 Days Later; same idea, different culture. And even if they had everything in common, there's no way superhero themes can be perceived the same way before and after 9/11. And sure enough, you can see how our culture and fears have changed between those two movies. Look at the Jokers, for instance.

Even people who didn't see either movie could guess that these were very different characters with very different portrayals. A deadly prankster versus an unstable terrorist.

Edited by SuperStingray, 29 July 2012 - 09:22 AM.

[lounge]

It'd be interesting if they did The Dark Knight Reborn using the Batman Beyond show as a template. Taking place in the Nolan verse. I'd love that. Seeing a reboot is the just too tiring for me to think of. I'd rather they continue the story even if it's 200 yrs in the future, and let the Nolan films stay for future generations. I think they can stand the test of time for decades to come, like many other great franchises like Lord of the Rings, Indy Jones, Star Wars. But that'll probably not happen.

[Deaf Guy in Music Plant]

It'd be interesting if they did The Dark Knight Reborn using the Batman Beyond show as a template. Taking place in the Nolan verse. I'd love that. Seeing a reboot is the just too tiring for me to think of. I'd rather they continue the story even if it's 200 yrs in the future, and let the Nolan films stay for future generations. I think they can stand the test of time for decades to come, like many other great franchises like Lord of the Rings, Indy Jones, Star Wars. But that'll probably not happen.

Nolan's Batman needs to be its own secluded universe to work. If Superman and Wonderfuck were flying around, Bruce's reasons for becoming the Batman would have been very different.

[-Bender-]

I watched a double showing of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight today at the cinema. I had forgotten how complex and brilliant the story is in The Dark Knight.

The Dark Knight Rises is a fantastic conclusion to the Nolan trilogy, but my favourite of the trilogy is The Dark Knight.

After watching the Dark Knight again I may have to change my opinion of the Dark Knight from being one of my favourite films, to being my number one favourite film ever. Keith Ledger is is pure genious.

Edited by MilesKnightwing, 29 July 2012 - 10:29 PM.

[lounge]

I thought they only showed Begins and DK one night only on july 19. I didn't get a chance to see the trilogy showing because it was like 40 bucks for Imax and I wanted to see Rises in 70mm.

[-Bender-]

I thought they only showed Begins and DK one night only on july 19. I didn't get a chance to see the trilogy showing because it was like 40 bucks for Imax and I wanted to see Rises in 70mm.

I saw the double showing of BB and TDK today (showcase cinemas) at 13:45pm. There was also a double showing on Saturday 28th at 13:45pm.

[Jango]

I saw it yesterday. I like it a lot, I still think the original Dark Knight is cooler, bigger and has more action, but the Rises comes right after it IMO. I wasn't sure about Bane being the villain, but the guy made a show, pretty fucking epic. I just didn't liked the ending, c'mon, Robin? I was hoping for Azrael, but oh well.

[Phos]

Just got back. Aside from being a source of some new internet memes that will get tired years before people stop using them, not great. Dunno what I was expecting after TDK, though, which was basically "Heath Ledger acts crazy for a bit".

[Dr. Good Girl]

I didn't care much for Heath Ledger's performance. He was a great actor for the role, no doubt, but his overdosing on drugs gave him too much credit for his performance. Many people say he's the only good Joker incarnation out there; they obviously haven't read the comics. I didn't like how his voice was too low and scratchy, at times he just sounded like a normal guy. His laughs weren't too "out there", especially in the beginning scene in the refrigerator room when his laughs were kinda just said out plain and monotonous like "Ha.. ha......... heh heh.... hoo hoo..... heh..........". This is unlike Mark Hamill's version, which I think is way better than Ledger's. Hamill's Joker sounds more hyper and more like he's always thrilled and enjoying himself all the time. I'm aware Nolan's universe has different incarnations of characters, but I'm getting a little tired of people just saying that Ledger was phenomenal and comparing or ranking him higher than any other incarnation in the Bat-verse.

[Sorceror Spudhead]

I think his laugh in that scene was supposed to be dead pan, he was stating that Lau's plan was a really bad joke.

Anyway, saw it today. Astonishing. I think Selina stole the show, she was captivating. Bane was way better than I expected though I still thought his voice was funny. The twists got me, the plot gripped me and it is a fitting end. It certainly did Rise.

[LunarEdge]

I saw it yesterday. I like it a lot, I still think the original Dark Knight is cooler, bigger and has more action, but the Rises comes right after it IMO. I wasn't sure about Bane being the villain, but the guy made a show, pretty fucking epic. I just didn't liked the ending, c'mon, Robin? I was hoping for Azrael, but oh well.

I was hoping for the same, since Azrael did take over after Bane "broke" the bat. It would have been fitting. Than again, I can see why they went the Robin route, since his character was "developed" over the course of the movie and his ideology of crime, corruption and etc changed over the course of the movie (to views that parallel that of Batman/Bruce). Introducing Azrael at the end when Bruce decides to fake his own death and hand the mantle over to someone else who didn't see the light of day in the movie would have been a bit off and weird.

Edited by LunarEdge, 30 July 2012 - 10:59 PM.

[turbojet]

The movie was sublime except for one part.

Spoiler

Robin? Really? God, I hate artistic licensing on things that don't really need to be changed. The thing is that Nolan thinks he is making a pragmatic adaptation of Batman when the series was already geared towards it to begin with. Everything the Nolan universe used to create these films came straight from the comics. What he takes artistic licensing on is pretty much frivolous(No Lazarus Pit. Okay? Realistic fighting? Umm you mean to say making "boring white guy style" Batman's style. Sure, but this would probably be more effective and pragmatic.) But to change an entire origin, no existence, of a character that has got to be the line where you take it too damn far. Not just any character, but ROBIN!?

To explain why I am so pissed off about this is simple. Robin's or John Blake's existence contributed nothing to the movie. Oh, a gumshoe cop who knows Bruce Wayne is Batman for whatever reason they never cared to explain other than for the sake of not explaining. I know Joseph Gordan-Levitt is a great actor so can't really blame him for trying to bring a character that is displacing a character that has been around for 60 years. Dick Grayson meant more than that. Robin meant more than some bullshit replacement or a middle name. For whatever reason, Nolan felt the need to change everything about the character, including his name(if I find out Blake is the name of a relative of Nolan's...).

"But Turbojet, a kid would be unrealistic?" Bull fucking shit. Dick Grayson was never just a kid. He was a circus acrobat so he could relatively receive physical training to kick ass and it would be more believable than some random dude off the street which John Blake definitely was. His name, "Robin" had the same significance to the character as Batman did to Bruce. As a matter of fact, changing who Robin is literally takes an aspect out of Bruce Wayne's character(Not Batman's though).

The thing is, Nolan tampered with something for the sake of just messing with. Robin has no significance to the Batman universe nor does it really matter in Nolan's world. Read that sentence, again, and see why it is wrong. Robin, a character that has been in more DC adaptations than Batman has no significance to the Batman Universe. What in the flying fuck?

And it is not just that it bothers me because he changed for whatever the fuck reason. He changed it for no reason. No one can buy that Bruce Wayne never adopted a kid who experienced the same pain as he? No one can buy that Bruce Wayne would not give the kid to seek justice and be a father figure to him so he can make up what he lost? Everything that was great about Nolan's universe is no different or not that far of a stretch from comic's Batman(Do not pull silver age's Batman out of your ass because that has been out of date for decades and was never taken seriously). Batman Begins was pretty much Batman Year One. Joker's characterization took notes from the Killing Joke. Hell, I knew who Talia was the moment she appeared on screen before she revealed herself(That accent gave her away). Hell, the absolutely magnificent parts of this movie came from Knightfall. So Robin's change of origin...what? Why? I will never understand why someone who claims to be such a Batman fan hates Robin so that he changes him for the worse. Urgh.

I say this as a huge Nightwing fan and Bat-family fan.

Otherwise, the movie was fantastic and was better than Batman Begins.

[Ringo ~]

The movie was sublime except for one part.

Spoiler

Robin? Really? God, I hate artistic licensing on things that don't really need to be changed. The thing is that Nolan thinks he is making a pragmatic adaptation of Batman when the series was already geared towards it to begin with. Everything the Nolan universe used to create these films came straight from the comics. What he takes artistic licensing on is pretty much frivolous(No Lazarus Pit. Okay? Realistic fighting? Umm you mean to say making "boring white guy style" Batman's style. Sure, but this would probably be more effective and pragmatic.) But to change an entire origin, no existence, of a character that has got to be the line where you take it too damn far. Not just any character, but ROBIN!?

To explain why I am so pissed off about this is simple. Robin's or John Blake's existence contributed nothing to the movie. Oh, a gumshoe cop who knows Bruce Wayne is Batman for whatever reason they never cared to explain other than for the sake of not explaining. I know Joseph Gordan-Levitt is a great actor so can't really blame him for trying to bring a character that is displacing a character that has been around for 60 years. Dick Grayson meant more than that. Robin meant more than some bullshit replacement or a middle name. For whatever reason, Nolan felt the need to change everything about the character, including his name(if I find out Blake is the name of a relative of Nolan's...).

"But Turbojet, a kid would be unrealistic?" Bull fucking shit. Dick Grayson was never just a kid. He was a circus acrobat so he could relatively receive physical training to kick ass and it would be more believable than some random dude off the street which John Blake definitely was. His name, "Robin" had the same significance to the character as Batman did to Bruce. As a matter of fact, changing who Robin is literally takes an aspect out of Bruce Wayne's character(Not Batman's though).

The thing is, Nolan tampered with something for the sake of just messing with. Robin has no significance to the Batman universe nor does it really matter in Nolan's world. Read that sentence, again, and see why it is wrong. Robin, a character that has been in more DC adaptations than Batman has no significance to the Batman Universe. What in the flying fuck?

And it is not just that it bothers me because he changed for whatever the fuck reason. He changed it for no reason. No one can buy that Bruce Wayne never adopted a kid who experienced the same pain as he? No one can buy that Bruce Wayne would not give the kid to seek justice and be a father figure to him so he can make up what he lost? Everything that was great about Nolan's universe is no different or not that far of a stretch from comic's Batman(Do not pull silver age's Batman out of your ass because that has been out of date for decades and was never taken seriously). Batman Begins was pretty much Batman Year One. Joker's characterization took notes from the Killing Joke. Hell, I knew who Talia was the moment she appeared on screen before she revealed herself(That accent gave her away). Hell, the absolutely magnificent parts of this movie came from Knightfall. So Robin's change of origin...what? Why? I will never understand why someone who claims to be such a Batman fan hates Robin so that he changes him for the worse. Urgh.

I say this as a huge Nightwing fan and Bat-family fan.

Otherwise, the movie was fantastic and was better than Batman Begins.

Spoiler

With all due respect, you seem to be getting a little too angry over something that seemed like a shout-out more than anything else. I don't think John Blake was hinted to become the Robin or Nightwing. Just as a successor to Batman. Hell, the way I saw it, it seemed he would be one to take Batman's cowl after Bruce relinquished it. At least, that's what I felt the ending was hinting towards. I didn't really feel significance to his name being Robin other than it being a shout-out. If that's your problem, then I can totally understand. Even so, I didn't really feel that Blake was ever geared or even hinted to become the Robin, so I don't really see the problem about his origin, because he's not actually Robin. His origin was so that he had a connection with Batman, and could have the right mindset to be his successor as Gotham's protector, it never once shows Blake as an alternate Dick Grayson, neither does it put him in that role.

Edited by Ringo ~, 05 August 2012 - 12:22 AM.

[El Driver]

The movie was sublime except for one part.

Spoiler

Robin? Really? God, I hate artistic licensing on things that don't really need to be changed. The thing is that Nolan thinks he is making a pragmatic adaptation of Batman when the series was already geared towards it to begin with. Everything the Nolan universe used to create these films came straight from the comics. What he takes artistic licensing on is pretty much frivolous(No Lazarus Pit. Okay? Realistic fighting? Umm you mean to say making "boring white guy style" Batman's style. Sure, but this would probably be more effective and pragmatic.) But to change an entire origin, no existence, of a character that has got to be the line where you take it too damn far. Not just any character, but ROBIN!?

To explain why I am so pissed off about this is simple. Robin's or John Blake's existence contributed nothing to the movie. Oh, a gumshoe cop who knows Bruce Wayne is Batman for whatever reason they never cared to explain other than for the sake of not explaining. I know Joseph Gordan-Levitt is a great actor so can't really blame him for trying to bring a character that is displacing a character that has been around for 60 years. Dick Grayson meant more than that. Robin meant more than some bullshit replacement or a middle name. For whatever reason, Nolan felt the need to change everything about the character, including his name(if I find out Blake is the name of a relative of Nolan's...).

"But Turbojet, a kid would be unrealistic?" Bull fucking shit. Dick Grayson was never just a kid. He was a circus acrobat so he could relatively receive physical training to kick ass and it would be more believable than some random dude off the street which John Blake definitely was. His name, "Robin" had the same significance to the character as Batman did to Bruce. As a matter of fact, changing who Robin is literally takes an aspect out of Bruce Wayne's character(Not Batman's though).

The thing is, Nolan tampered with something for the sake of just messing with. Robin has no significance to the Batman universe nor does it really matter in Nolan's world. Read that sentence, again, and see why it is wrong. Robin, a character that has been in more DC adaptations than Batman has no significance to the Batman Universe. What in the flying fuck?

And it is not just that it bothers me because he changed for whatever the fuck reason. He changed it for no reason. No one can buy that Bruce Wayne never adopted a kid who experienced the same pain as he? No one can buy that Bruce Wayne would not give the kid to seek justice and be a father figure to him so he can make up what he lost? Everything that was great about Nolan's universe is no different or not that far of a stretch from comic's Batman(Do not pull silver age's Batman out of your ass because that has been out of date for decades and was never taken seriously). Batman Begins was pretty much Batman Year One. Joker's characterization took notes from the Killing Joke. Hell, I knew who Talia was the moment she appeared on screen before she revealed herself(That accent gave her away). Hell, the absolutely magnificent parts of this movie came from Knightfall. So Robin's change of origin...what? Why? I will never understand why someone who claims to be such a Batman fan hates Robin so that he changes him for the worse. Urgh.

I say this as a huge Nightwing fan and Bat-family fan.

Otherwise, the movie was fantastic and was better than Batman Begins.

Spoiler

With all due respect, you seem to be getting a little too angry over something that seemed like a shout-out more than anything else. I don't think John Blake was hinted to become the Robin or Nightwing. Just as a successor to Batman. Hell, the way I saw it, it seemed he would be one to take Batman's cowl after Bruce relinquished it. At least, that's what I felt the ending was hinting towards. I didn't really feel significance to his name being Robin other than it being a shout-out. If that's your problem, then I can totally understand. Even so, I didn't really feel that Blake was ever geared or even hinted to become the Robin, so I don't really see the problem about his origin, because he's not actually Robin. His origin was so that he had a connection with Batman, and could have the right mindset to be his successor as Gotham's protector, it never once shows Blake as an alternate Dick Grayson, neither does it put him in that role.

I'm going to agree & disagree with both of these statements:

Spoiler

I agree with you Turbojet I also didn't like that they changed Robin's origin story. I was never really a fan about let's add some reality in Batman's world since by having a billionaire dressed as a giant bat ruins that idea. Somehow I thought that limited the potential the trilogy had (though they are still damn good movies)

Saying that I think that he decided to go against it since I think as soon as the audience knew that Dick Grayson was going to come out they will also want him to be Robin and people would have been disappointed that he didn't put on the costume. By changing the name he did not have to meet up expectations as much.

I will say that it was nice that he was all three Robins at once. Dick Grayson was a cop at one point and the name Robin came from him, Jason Todd's street life, and how like Tim Drake he was able to deduce Batman's identity. Since this is the last Batman movie in this storyline I think it was best that DIck Grayson was not introduce....though if there's a fourth one I will be piss he didn't get introduced.

And for Ringo this was basically Batman & Robin (before the tights of course). Maybe if the story continues he will be the next Batman but I think in this movie he was in the sidekick role making him Nolan's Robin

[Ringo ~]

I'm going to agree & disagree with both of these statements:

Spoiler

I agree with you Turbojet I also didn't like that they changed Robin's origin story. I was never really a fan about let's add some reality in Batman's world since by having a billionaire dressed as a giant bat ruins that idea. Somehow I thought that limited the potential the trilogy had (though they are still damn good movies)

Saying that I think that he decided to go against it since I think as soon as the audience knew that Dick Grayson was going to come out they will also want him to be Robin and people would have been disappointed that he didn't put on the costume. By changing the name he did not have to meet up expectations as much.

I will say that it was nice that he was all three Robins at once. Dick Grayson was a cop at one point and the name Robin came from him, Jason Todd's street life, and how like Tim Drake he was able to deduce Batman's identity. Since this is the last Batman movie in this storyline I think it was best that DIck Grayson was not introduce....though if there's a fourth one I will be piss he didn't get introduced.

And for Ringo this was basically Batman & Robin (before the tights of course). Maybe if the story continues he will be the next Batman but I think in this movie he was in the sidekick role making him Nolan's Robin

Spoiler

Again, I really didn't see him as playing the role as Nolan's Robin to Batman, or hell, even as his sidekick, To be perfectly honest, I don't there really was a sidekick present in the movie, and if there was, it certainly wasn't Blake. He didn't really do that much as previously stated, and he certainly didn't fight alongside Batman or assist him that much, at least no more than other characters did. I'd argue that both Gordon and Catwoman played the "sidekick" role more than Blake did, even though I wouldn't call it that personally.

I'm not denying that Blake theoretically could become Robin or Nightwing in the sequel that will never be made, but I just don't think the film ever really hinted to that possibility. If that reference to his name being Robin hadn't been thrown in, I don't think there would be reactions like this.

To me and to most of the people I've talked to who have seen this flick, it was just a nice little shout-out to the fans. The film just seemed to hint that Blake would become the next Batman, and in my opinion, there wasn't really much there to suggest that he would become Robin, or serve as "Nolan's Robin".

While I guess Blake's story could have drawn influences from the different origins of Robin, I don't think that was the intention. Hell, Dick Grayson was a gymnast before he became Robin, and to be honest I think you're stretching when referring to Jason and Tim and their possible influence on Blake.

That's just my take though.

[El Driver]

Spoiler

Again, I really didn't see him as playing the role as Nolan's Robin to Batman, or hell, even as his sidekick, To be perfectly honest, I don't there really was a sidekick present in the movie, and if there was, it certainly wasn't Blake. He didn't really do that much as previously stated, and he certainly didn't fight alongside Batman or assist him that much, at least no more than other characters did. I'd argue that both Gordon and Catwoman played the "sidekick" role more than Blake did, even though I wouldn't call it that personally.

I'm not denying that Blake theoretically could become Robin or Nightwing in the sequel that will never be made, but I just don't think the film ever really hinted to that possibility. If that reference to his name being Robin hadn't been thrown in, I don't think there would be reactions like this.

To me and to most of the people I've talked to who have seen this flick, it was just a nice little shout-out to the fans. The film just seemed to hint that Blake would become the next Batman, and in my opinion, there wasn't really much there to suggest that he would become Robin, or serve as "Nolan's Robin".

While I guess Blake's story could have drawn influences from the different origins of Robin, I don't think that was the intention. Hell, Dick Grayson was a gymnast before he became Robin, and to be honest I think you're stretching when referring to Jason and Tim and their possible influence on Blake.

That's just my take though.

True I guess that I can see it from your point of view. I do hope they continue the story somehow, it doesn't have to be necessarily movies. They could do what they did with Smallville and continue the story in comic form.

[SpikySprinter]

Two things about this movie are really bugging me.

Spoiler

Okay Batman, we've got roughly two minutes to get that bomb away from the people! Good luck and- Batman? Um... what are you doing? You don't really have time for goodbyes. Okay good, you're getting in your aircraft. Took your time doing it, but that's good, now- WHY ARE YOU STILL STALLING?! Get that bomb out of here! Some days you just WON'T get rid of a bomb!!

and

Spoiler

Okay Batman, Bane is fucking you up! Time to use those projectile arm spikes that took out the Joker!! Batman? It's not that hard, just shoot them at his legs! BATMAN YOU DUMBASS USE YOUR ARM SPIKES!!! Up, up, too late. Ouch, man. (2 hours later) Alright Batman this time you've come back with a vengeance! Time to use those spikes and... Dammit Bruce.... Okay you beat him. OUCH!!! Arm spikes? Nope.

Edited by SpikySprinter, 11 August 2012 - 03:10 AM.

[Gabe]

Just poking in to say that I finally understand how at the end of the climax...

Spoiler

..Batman/Bruce "survived" the nuclear bomb. Well, he didn't-that's not to say he didn't survive the explosion in which that is totally false, as shown in the ending, but more along the lines that he didn't survive the nuclear bomb because he was nowhere near it. Recall that near the end of the film, when Lucius Fox discovers that "The Bat" aircraft's autopilot was fixed/programmed six months prior to the conclusion of the events in the film...

Of course, it clicked in my head after reading some people's opinions of the film online. If you already deduced this, good for you, you're not as slow as me.

Edited by Zinos, 11 August 2012 - 12:56 PM.