My personal opinion is that this wasn't as good as Dark Knight but also like that film was full of plot holes. Surprise endings weren't for me. Also, could easily cut 40 minutes from it and not affect the plot.

It was a very well made film and was good overall.

The things that have made the Dark Knight and this film good is the performances of the villains. Heath Ledger as Joker was great and the characterisation of Bane here was also great. Catwoman was nicely done, better than I expected.

Best superhero film ever? Far far from it. Half of Marvel's are better than this.

Sorry this isn't quick paced or 'infinite' than life Avengers. This is the Dark Knight epic and if you wanted to compare it other superhero action movies, they should have the bar lifted higher and sadly those are none other than Nolan's two previous Batman films that qualify for. The length is highly justified and it's difficult to see any other way, how better the plot could been made to attain the shorter version to end the series. Yeah the Joker IMO stills stands second to none.

I can actully see where your coming from.

I personally thought the movie was okay, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight were much better films. But the special effects, action, etc in this were the best of the 3. Mainly because they did quite a lot of stuff during the day, as opposed to at night for TDK, so that chase scene at the end was amazing. But The Bat (Batwing) looked dissapointing.

I felt parts of the film didnt work, because they tried to do too much; hence why it was too long. Its a 3 hour film, and in that time we dont see much of Bale as Batman. And thats a consequence of making an ambitious film like The Dark Knight Rises the last film in a trilogy. Trying to tie up all the loose ends in this film was a mistake in my opinion. The way the story was handeled, propelling the characters 8 years from the 2nd film was an unecessary attempt to incoperate the comic book 'The Dark Knight Returns'; I felt that story was unncessary here.

The only reason I think they decided to draw inspiration from The Dark Knight Returns was because this is the last film in the trilogy. For example if Bane and Catwoman were the villains in the 2nd film, would have they had done this in the same way? I dont think so.

I think the problem was that Nolan was trying too hard to make this a climatic end to a trilogy; when they could rather have focused on making a film that stands in its own element.

I mean, you can go and watch The Dark Knight as many times as you want, and you dont need to have seen Batman Begins, it even felt like TDK couldve been the first film in the series. Those films stood so well as stand alone installments; the problem I felt here was that this film cannot stand on its own. You will need to have seen Batman Begins and The Dark Knight beforehand to appreciate what they were doing here. And thats the problem I felt was with the movie.

Nolan tried to hard to build a movie that stood both on its own and as a sequel/trilogy conclusion. And for those reasons it took too long to build towards things, there was too much a prolonged abscent of Batman in a Batman film.

On a side note, it seems obvious to me, that had Heath Ledger survived, they would have done things a lot differently. So potentially this film couldve been much better, but that didnt have a choice than to make it this way so...

When I went to see Lord of The Rings: The Two Towers, there was a huge round of applause at the end of the movie.

Same thing happened when I went to see The Dark Knight.

Nothing happened with The Dark Knight Rises.

Admittidly when I went to see Lord of The Rings, and TDK, the crowd was much more sophisitcated and upmarket; thus it could explain why! All depends on your crowd, which could depend on the geographical location of your theatre.

I need to fully examine TDKR when it comes out on Blu-Ray, but Right now i think TDK is better(imo). I dont know about you guys but when ever i watch movies in the theaters it always feels like i miss things or dont appreciate the movie as much as i should be. Movies always seem better when you watch them a second time at home. Like when i first watched TDK in the theaters i thought it was an ok movie but it was not until i watched it for the second time at home i truely payed attention to the characters and story and realized that it was an absolute masterpiece one of the best movies ever made (imo)

Also i REALLY needed to do a piss during the second half of TDKR but i didn't want to leave the theater so i just held it in and i ended up almost pissing myself. I better make sure i go to the toilet and dont drink anything during the Hobbit 0_0

This movie was holy-shit-I-think-I'm-going-to-have-a-heart-attack intense. There was no humor to speak of and I was completely okay with that. Nolan was crafting a spiraling world within Gotham. In this movie, there wasn't much to laugh about because Nolan cranked the Intens-O-Meter to 11 and held it there for over two hours. It was the logical emotional continuation of The Dark Knight.

This movie was epic in every sense of the word. Everything felt huge.

I'm still not sold on Bane's face being covered but I certainly will not fault Hardy's performance. While he lacked the sly cunning and manipulation of the Joker, he is a different kind of villain and near the end, it's revealed why he is doing what he's doing. That part took me by surprise. Something felt... off... with the characters but I couldn't pin down what it was. When it was revealed, it was a face-slapping moment for me.

Overall, I really couldn't have been happier with the film. It was a large, bombastic ending to what is one of the best trilogies ever created. Nolan did a masterful job of breaking down Gotham City over three films and making the audience truly care about the outcome.

But comparing this movie to The Avengers is just folly. They're not even close to being the same movie. One is light-hearted and fun, the other is everything but light-hearted.

This

Also this.

The movie is boring as hell.

How is Catwoman pointless?

She acts as a mirror to Bruce at times. They both have a broken past & they both WANT to lose their identity (that's Catwomans motive for getting that chip thingy). And at the end they both achieve that by Bruce faking his death to Gotham & Catwoman disappearing with him.

Maybe if Tate wasn't Taalia and the ending had Bruce sitting with Tate then you would have an argument for Catwoman being pointless but because of the ending & subtle connection she & bruce made I don't think you can call Catwoman pointless.

I'm with you Pezus, it was a great movie. And I think Bane- though obviously more subdued- was every bit as well acted and powerful as Ledger's Joker.