The Dark Knight Rises

[Zurg]

was definitely really chron. i dont know if its quite dark knight, but you shouldnt expect that anyway. surprised how well anne hathaway did as catwoman

[360 frip]

Alfred is good.

The plot relied heavily on knightfall.

The whole bomb thing was stupid.

To be honest, none of his 3 films have been all that. The whole realistic approach just seems dumb. Surely someone could have come up with a more interesting approach by now? At least Sin City tried to keep the feel of the comics.

[victor333]

Alfred is good.

The plot relied heavily on knightfall.

The whole bomb thing was stupid.

To be honest, none of his 3 films have been all that. The whole realistic approach just seems dumb. Surely someone could have come up with a more interesting approach by now? At least Sin City tried to keep the feel of the comics.

I don't get when people say they don't like the Nolan Batmans being grounded in reality. I know there's different iterations and series of batman, but he's the dark knight. The subject matter is dark, the city is corrupt and violent.

The Burton Batman was good, but the Schumacher ones were just campy garbage. Nolan crafted a believable batman world which allowed people to relate more; it was heavier, and it felt more grand - just my opinion, but the reception to the films tells me a lot of people feel the same way.

I will agree with you that Sin City did a great job handling the material and getting the feel of the comics. At the same time, it's kind of like apples to oranges. You can't handle an action hero like Batman the same way you would handle a methodical, detective, noir film thing.

[duffmanshredder]

I think I may be in the minority here, but I really did not enjoy the movie.

[Nancy Chin The Manicurist]

I think I may be in the minority here, but I really did not enjoy the movie.

I watched the movie. Let it settle. Watched it again. Then let it settle a little more . . . . . .

And I'm with you duffmanshredder.

Though the film wasn't bad per se (a handful of sequences were worth the price of admission alone), I still find all the universal acclaim its been getting as rather unwarranted. It was one, big, huge clusterfuck. Nolan shot his wad a little too far with this one in certain respects. A few of the story beats towards the end of the film had my eyes rolling every which way.

Also, the film had a chance to end on an ambiguous note  (ala. Inception, but not quite . . cause that would be tacky), but got a complete gag inducing cop-out of a bookend instead.


Though i  must say, I really really like Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle. Maybe its cause i wasn't expecting much in the first place . . .

[Bobby Peru]

SPOILER CITY BELOW

Also, the film had a chance to end on an ambiguous note  (ala. Inception, but not quite . . cause that would be tacky), but got a complete gag inducing cop-out of a bookend instead.

I assume you mean the scene at the cafe? I see where you're coming from, but Batman and Catwoman getting together was satisfying on a Mulder and Scully getting together scale. And it would be hard to live with Alfred being bummed to death.

And to the goofus who said Nolan's realistic style doesn't fit with the comics, Batman has had so many different authors and artists for over 70 years making so many different styles, and Nolan's take fits right in. And as a fan of the comics, I think Burton's movies were total bastardizations.


A few things:

1: I FUCKING KNEW MARION COTILLARD WOULD BE TALIA

2: Anne Hathaway haters:


3: I was frustrated by the first act. I found it hard to believe Alfred would let Bruce fall into seclusion for eight years before he had enough and let him in on the letter.

4: BUT the cane in the first act did a great job of disguising the back breaking scene in the trailers. I, like everybody, assumed those scenes would be later in the movie, and not the beginning.

5: How much better would the 'trial' scenes have been if it was the Joker instead of Crane as the judge?


Overall, I loved it and thought it was a fitting end to the series.

[Bobby Peru]

Also, regarding the upcoming reboot, I have a feeling that it will prepare Batman to be a member of the Justice League, given the upcoming Superman movie and the recent Green Lantern one. Snyder has hinted at it, and you can't really top the action of ninjas with guns and tanks vs. cops and batwings unless you bring in Superman's aliens and shit, as they did with The Avengers.

[codithou]

This movie was fucking great. It was NOT perfect but it was tied together perfectly with the other films. It's only fault, in my opinion, is that it really can't stand on it's own. It's part of a trilogy and always has to be that way.  A few things I loved:

• * Casting for the new characters was perfect. Hathaway is by far the best Catwoman (And they never referred to her as Catwoman), Tom Hardy was the perfect Bane. He somehow managed to balance a sense of chaos, fear, and brutality all with most of his face covered, and Joseph Gordon Levitt's Robin was a great mix between Tim Drake and Dick Grayson.
• * The scenes that came out of the comics. The back breaking scene and a few others where pretty much pulled directly from the comics. Having Scarecrow as the judge in those citizen court hearings was awesome and that entire set looked almost identical to one of the comics. Also, the references to Killer Croc was cool.
• * The use of Bane's prison pit as a mirror of the comics Lazerus Pit. In the comics, Ra's was literally immortal but in the film it was done in a way that his goal was immortal through Talia, who was born in the pit. Bruce is also "reborn" because of it.
• * The ending was a great way to tie together the message of the entire trilogy. It may have been a bit cliche, but it worked perfectly and I can't imagine any other ending really closing it up the right way.

Also, my friends little sister played the young Talia. I thought that was rad, personally.

[360 frip]

SPOILER CITY BELOW

Also, the film had a chance to end on an ambiguous note  (ala. Inception, but not quite . . cause that would be tacky), but got a complete gag inducing cop-out of a bookend instead.

I assume you mean the scene at the cafe? I see where you're coming from, but Batman and Catwoman getting together was satisfying on a Mulder and Scully getting together scale. And it would be hard to live with Alfred being bummed to death.

And to the goofus who said Nolan's realistic style doesn't fit with the comics, Batman has had so many different authors and artists for over 70 years making so many different styles, and Nolan's take fits right in. And as a fan of the comics, I think Burton's movies were total bastardizations.


A few things:

1: I FUCKING KNEW MARION COTILLARD WOULD BE TALIA

2: Anne Hathaway haters:


3: I was frustrated by the first act. I found it hard to believe Alfred would let Bruce fall into seclusion for eight years before he had enough and let him in on the letter.

4: BUT the cane in the first act did a great job of disguising the back breaking scene in the trailers. I, like everybody, assumed those scenes would be later in the movie, and not the beginning.

5: How much better would the 'trial' scenes have been if it was the Joker instead of Crane as the judge?


Overall, I loved it and thought it was a fitting end to the series.

I wasn't the greatest fan of Burton's Batman either. In general, Hollywood can't do comics very well. They weren't dark at all really. Look at the Killing Joke, Year One and Dark Knight Returns, all of them were way darker and had more of story and feel to them.

The thing I found was making these films look "realistic" made Batman look ridiculous. A few points in the film Batman just looked silly standing there in his suit, talking like a twat. The twist was pretty weak too and seemed pointless. Going for these big grandiose story lines is just typical Hollywood.

[saucy ragu]

I wasn't the greatest fan of Burton's Batman either. In general, Hollywood can't do comics very well. They weren't dark at all really. Look at the Killing Joke, Year One and Dark Knight Returns, all of them were way darker and had more of story and feel to them.

The thing I found was making these films look "realistic" made Batman look ridiculous. A few points in the film Batman just looked silly standing there in his suit, talking like a twat. The twist was pretty weak too and seemed pointless. Going for these big grandiose story lines is just typical Hollywood.

Dog, if you don't realize by now that the movie will never match the written imagination, do yourself a favor and let that fact sink in now. You have to take film adaptations for just that, and hope their references to the written source material are true as they can be, while also taking into account that this is an entirely different medium and story altogether. If you look at any scene of Batman standing in a suit "talking like a twat" (both film and comics) then normalcy will tell you, it is silly and ridiculous. Nothing makes it cool unless you want it to be. Batman is always a big grandiose story.. that's what makes any comic character interesting and relatable. If you don't like it, you don't like it. But don't try to blame it on generalized gradations of book vs. movie because you're not presenting a debatable issue there, you're presenting accepted fact.

Also, as for "talking like a twat" and anyone who thinks the hoarse voice is unnecessary:



Right there, taken from "Knightfall." Just because you can't hear it in the books, doesn't mean that's not the way it's meant to be.

[360 frip]

I wasn't the greatest fan of Burton's Batman either. In general, Hollywood can't do comics very well. They weren't dark at all really. Look at the Killing Joke, Year One and Dark Knight Returns, all of them were way darker and had more of story and feel to them.

The thing I found was making these films look "realistic" made Batman look ridiculous. A few points in the film Batman just looked silly standing there in his suit, talking like a twat. The twist was pretty weak too and seemed pointless. Going for these big grandiose story lines is just typical Hollywood.

Dog, if you don't realize by now that the movie will never match the written imagination, do yourself a favor and let that fact sink in now. You have to take film adaptations for just that, and hope their references to the written source material are true as they can be, while also taking into account that this is an entirely different medium and story altogether. If you look at any scene of Batman standing in a suit "talking like a twat" (both film and comics) then normalcy will tell you, it is silly and ridiculous. Nothing makes it cool unless you want it to be. Batman is always a big grandiose story.. that's what makes any comic character interesting and relatable. If you don't like it, you don't like it. But don't try to blame it on generalized gradations of book vs. movie because you're not presenting a debatable issue there, you're presenting accepted fact.

Also, as for "talking like a twat" and anyone who thinks the hoarse voice is unnecessary:



Right there, taken from "Knightfall." Just because you can't hear it in the books, doesn't mean that's not the way it's meant to be.

It wasn't a very good adaptation. It could  have been done more imaginatively. Obviously you can't exactly match the other, but 20 + years down the line and still on this MI-style shit?

Obviously there is a gap between the two mediums but do something with that. If you don't expect anything, then you're happy whatever I suppose.

[codithou]

What the fuck are you talking about "more imaginatively" and "gap between the two mediums but do something with that."?

[victor333]

What the fuck are you talking about "more imaginatively" and "gap between the two mediums but do something with that."?

he means less this:



and more this:

[camel filters]

SPOILER CITY BELOW

Also, the film had a chance to end on an ambiguous note  (ala. Inception, but not quite . . cause that would be tacky), but got a complete gag inducing cop-out of a bookend instead.

I assume you mean the scene at the cafe? I see where you're coming from, but Batman and Catwoman getting together was satisfying on a Mulder and Scully getting together scale. And it would be hard to live with Alfred being bummed to death.

I thought the last scene would have been better if it cut on michael caines face lighting up from seeing something across the cafe leaving the reaction shot of bale up to our imagination. and i hope to god they dont continue with the series with levitt as the new batman/fighting crime as robin.

[sexualhelon]

I haven't seen this yet but if it's a clusterfuck the reasoning behind that would probably be the fact that Heath Ledger died forcing Christopher Nolan to start over on everything he had in mind. I could be wrong but I feel like I remember hearing the studio pressured him into making a new script by a current date and then this movie still came out a little later than it was supposed to.

[bentmode]

Too much schtick.

[Cadillac Ranch Dressing]

SPOILER CITY BELOW

Also, the film had a chance to end on an ambiguous note  (ala. Inception, but not quite . . cause that would be tacky), but got a complete gag inducing cop-out of a bookend instead.

I assume you mean the scene at the cafe? I see where you're coming from, but Batman and Catwoman getting together was satisfying on a Mulder and Scully getting together scale. And it would be hard to live with Alfred being bummed to death.

I thought the last scene would have been better if it cut on michael caines face lighting up from seeing something across the cafe leaving the reaction shot of bale up to our imagination. and i hope to god they dont continue with the series with levitt as the new batman/fighting crime as robin.

That would have been so much better.

[Ronald Wilson Reagan]

5: How much better would the 'trial' scenes have been if it was the Joker instead of Crane as the judge?

I was thinking this exact thing while the movie was on. Crane was out because the prison got busted open, and according to the storyline The Joker was in that prison too. Fucking lame that Ledger had to die. He would have been AMAZING in that role.

Criticize this Bane all you want, its 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times better than the last movie Bane, where he couldn't even talk and dies without much of a fight at all. What a fucking shame that was.

What I thought made this one cool was knowing coming in that Nolan said it was the final chapter, so anything could have happened, especially with Bane as the bad guy, and really, in the end, although he survives, Bruce's life is pretty destroyed despite surviving.  Of course, when I saw that scene at the beginning, I knew they were giving it the ol' Good Will Hunting ending.

I was kind of hoping that it would end with him actually killing bane instead of Selena doing it, the way he so obsesively avoids killing people I thought it would be an awesome end. He was ready to do it too, its a shame it didn't go down that way.

Overall, a satisfying end to the trilogy, flawed at points, but a really intense movie.

[Nancy Chin The Manicurist]

SPOILER CITY BELOW

Also, the film had a chance to end on an ambiguous note  (ala. Inception, but not quite . . cause that would be tacky), but got a complete gag inducing cop-out of a bookend instead.

I assume you mean the scene at the cafe? I see where you're coming from, but Batman and Catwoman getting together was satisfying on a Mulder and Scully getting together scale. And it would be hard to live with Alfred being bummed to death.

I thought the last scene would have been better if it cut on michael caines face lighting up from seeing something across the cafe leaving the reaction shot of bale up to our imagination. and i hope to god they dont continue with the series with levitt as the new batman/fighting crime as robin.

That would have been so much better.

This is EXACTLY the ending I was thinking of.

Also, its been written many times since Batman Begins first came out that one of the stipulations Christian Bale and Nolan agreed upon before making the movie series was that Robin would never ever in a million years show his face in the trilogy. Bale fucking hated the the whole concept of having a Robin-esque character within this modern day vision of the Batman mythology.
I dunno if the studio pressured them into doing so (cause this is the type of shit they do) . . . but that little thing they pulled with Joseph Gordon Levitt's character at the end was sooooooo lame. It really wasn't called for, and pretty pandering.

If they were to do a *wink wink nudge nudge* thing to the audience, why couldn't they have just said his full legal name was Richard Greyson or something, instead of fuckin "ROBIN." There were definitely a few instances in the film that seemed to impugn the audience's movie-watching comprehension, opting to hold the viewer's hand by fucking explaining shit that wasn't exactly rocket science to begin with.



The film's predecessor, "The Dark Knight," didn't do any of that shit.

[camel filters]

SPOILER CITY BELOW

Also, the film had a chance to end on an ambiguous note  (ala. Inception, but not quite . . cause that would be tacky), but got a complete gag inducing cop-out of a bookend instead.

I assume you mean the scene at the cafe? I see where you're coming from, but Batman and Catwoman getting together was satisfying on a Mulder and Scully getting together scale. And it would be hard to live with Alfred being bummed to death.

I thought the last scene would have been better if it cut on michael caines face lighting up from seeing something across the cafe leaving the reaction shot of bale up to our imagination. and i hope to god they dont continue with the series with levitt as the new batman/fighting crime as robin.

That would have been so much better.

This is EXACTLY the ending I was thinking of.

Also, its been written many times since Batman Begins first came out that one of the stipulations Christian Bale and Nolan agreed upon before making the movie series was that Robin would never ever in a million years show his face in the trilogy. Bale fucking hated the the whole concept of having a Robin-esque character within this modern day vision of the Batman mythology.
I dunno if the studio pressured them into doing so (cause this is the type of shit they do) . . . but that little thing they pulled with Joseph Gordon Levitt's character at the end was sooooooo lame. It really wasn't called for, and pretty pandering.

If they were to do a *wink wink nudge nudge* thing to the audience, why couldn't they have just said his full legal name was Richard Greyson or something, instead of fuckin "ROBIN." There were definitely a few instances in the film that seemed to impugn the audience's movie-watching comprehension, opting to hold the viewer's hand by fucking explaining shit that wasn't exactly rocket science to begin with.



The film's predecessor, "The Dark Knight," didn't do any of that shit.

Nolan had a lot on his plate wrapping this series up. There were a lot of themes left from the 2nd film to resolve. Up until now, I had no reason to doubt his judgement. There is a great film buried in the dark knight rises. Like you said, I feel like a lot was over explained instead of trusting the audiences' intelligence. The filmmaker in me wants to do my own edit of this film once its on dvd, although I hope Nolan does a director cut of his own thats at least 30 minutes shorter. The pieces of a masterpiece are there, it just didn't have the rhythm necessary to deliver. 

[S.E.]

You gotta wonder what Nolan and co had in mind for the finale before Heath died.  You know when he got the news of his death, Nolan must of shit himself.   

[cool spot]

Killer Croc joke near the beginning of the movie got me chuckling. The first 2/3s of the movie were much better than the last. I'm glad they had the image of Bane dropping Batman over his knee. Marion Cotillard is still fucking smoking hot.

[Nancy Chin The Manicurist]

SPOILER CITY BELOW

Also, the film had a chance to end on an ambiguous note  (ala. Inception, but not quite . . cause that would be tacky), but got a complete gag inducing cop-out of a bookend instead.

I assume you mean the scene at the cafe? I see where you're coming from, but Batman and Catwoman getting together was satisfying on a Mulder and Scully getting together scale. And it would be hard to live with Alfred being bummed to death.

I thought the last scene would have been better if it cut on michael caines face lighting up from seeing something across the cafe leaving the reaction shot of bale up to our imagination. and i hope to god they dont continue with the series with levitt as the new batman/fighting crime as robin.

That would have been so much better.

This is EXACTLY the ending I was thinking of.

Also, its been written many times since Batman Begins first came out that one of the stipulations Christian Bale and Nolan agreed upon before making the movie series was that Robin would never ever in a million years show his face in the trilogy. Bale fucking hated the the whole concept of having a Robin-esque character within this modern day vision of the Batman mythology.
I dunno if the studio pressured them into doing so (cause this is the type of shit they do) . . . but that little thing they pulled with Joseph Gordon Levitt's character at the end was sooooooo lame. It really wasn't called for, and pretty pandering.

If they were to do a *wink wink nudge nudge* thing to the audience, why couldn't they have just said his full legal name was Richard Greyson or something, instead of fuckin "ROBIN." There were definitely a few instances in the film that seemed to impugn the audience's movie-watching comprehension, opting to hold the viewer's hand by fucking explaining shit that wasn't exactly rocket science to begin with.



The film's predecessor, "The Dark Knight," didn't do any of that shit.

Nolan had a lot on his plate wrapping this series up. There were a lot of themes left from the 2nd film to resolve. Up until now, I had no reason to doubt his judgement. There is a great film buried in the dark knight rises. Like you said, I feel like a lot was over explained instead of trusting the audiences' intelligence. The filmmaker in me wants to do my own edit of this film once its on dvd, although I hope Nolan does a director cut of his own thats at least 30 minutes shorter. The pieces of a masterpiece are there, it just didn't have the rhythm necessary to deliver. 

agreed on all accounts, especially what I bolded.

With the task of wrapping the series up, it seems likes Nolan tried to keep in mind what certain niche spectators would wanna see in a final installment  (comic book enthusiasts, geeks, cinephiles, critics, general popcorn popping audiences, etc.), and kinda went all over the map as to keeping everyone happy and satiated.

Certain parts of the film were fucking amazing, but a lot of it was ultimately tarnishing to all the cinematic momentum Nolan and co. had been building upon up and to this point in time.

And what we're left with is an unnecessarily bloated mess.

[duffmanshredder]

[Donkey Lips]

Just saw it. Way different than expected. Completely different tone from the last film. I really enjoyed it, and Tom Hardy, for having such little dialogue, really stole the show. First act felt rushed. Last 8 minutes also felt rushed. I'm going to have to see it and digest it again in order to shit out a decent opinion. Spoiler below.

I would make an honest woman out of Anne Hathaway.

[poopmonkey]

Awesome movie as expected, but the ending did feel a little rushed. Bruce wayne's "burial" and the caf? scene were too close together to really give you the idea bruce/batman had actually died in the explosion. it would've been more satisfying if he were actually dead, but batman saved gotham once and for all, and the whole robin bit would've been left out. would've been really epic to end the trilogy on a dark note. Also agree that the inception-esque michael caine-only ending would've been better than actually seeing bruce and selina together. Also, when bane and his henchmen escape from wall street it's light out, but "within 8 minutes" according to the movie, it's totally dark out (during the motorcycle chase). That was a pretty big flaw.

When batman and catwoman kiss in full constume, people were clapping. and here, NO ONE fucking claps at the movies, so that was pretty epic.

An awesome movie with a few flaws but all in all an awesome way to end the trilogy. can't wait to get my hands on some special edition blu-ray for all the extras.

[Mundungus]

If you liked Tom Hardy and haven't already seen Bronson, you should really check it out.. It's on Netflix.

[saucy ragu]

SPOILER CITY BELOW

Also, the film had a chance to end on an ambiguous note  (ala. Inception, but not quite . . cause that would be tacky), but got a complete gag inducing cop-out of a bookend instead.

I assume you mean the scene at the cafe? I see where you're coming from, but Batman and Catwoman getting together was satisfying on a Mulder and Scully getting together scale. And it would be hard to live with Alfred being bummed to death.

I thought the last scene would have been better if it cut on michael caines face lighting up from seeing something across the cafe leaving the reaction shot of bale up to our imagination. and i hope to god they dont continue with the series with levitt as the new batman/fighting crime as robin.

That would have been so much better.

This is EXACTLY the ending I was thinking of.

Also, its been written many times since Batman Begins first came out that one of the stipulations Christian Bale and Nolan agreed upon before making the movie series was that Robin would never ever in a million years show his face in the trilogy. Bale fucking hated the the whole concept of having a Robin-esque character within this modern day vision of the Batman mythology.
I dunno if the studio pressured them into doing so (cause this is the type of shit they do) . . . but that little thing they pulled with Joseph Gordon Levitt's character at the end was sooooooo lame. It really wasn't called for, and pretty pandering.

If they were to do a *wink wink nudge nudge* thing to the audience, why couldn't they have just said his full legal name was Richard Greyson or something, instead of fuckin "ROBIN." There were definitely a few instances in the film that seemed to impugn the audience's movie-watching comprehension, opting to hold the viewer's hand by fucking explaining shit that wasn't exactly rocket science to begin with.



The film's predecessor, "The Dark Knight," didn't do any of that shit.

I would have liked the ambiguous ending at the cafe more as well, but I did smile more than scoff when I saw a healthy and happy looking Bruce cheers-ing Alfred. I also agree that the editing could've used some major trimming and replacement.

As far as the Robin inclusion.. I liked it. I had an idea from the onset with Batman Begins that there would be someone to pick up the mantle when his time was done. In Begins, he said he wanted to be a "symbol, more than just a man." In The Dark Knight, he was already looking for someone to replace him, albeit without a mask. In TDKR, early on he saw in Blake similarities between themselves and his passion for a more unorthodox, yet respectable kind of justice. This motivated him to reveal his intent with Batman, to be able to pass it along and never have it be just about Bruce Wayne. They found a believable way to include a character to don the cowl while relating them to the Robin's of the mythos.

Throughout the years, Nolan and co. have always given/allowed plenty of information without revealing true intentions or disguising words to allow ambiguity. I think Christian just never wanted to see a 12-year-old Robin flying around in a leotard like in the comics. I don't think many people did, but you'd be hard-pressed to disagree that the films didn't pave the way for someone to take over. First it was meant to be a true public hero, Dent. But Bruce realized it had to be someone who couldn't be broken when the chips were down, someone who could make sacrifices in a way a tax-paid protector of justice couldn't. Jonathan Nolan convinced his brother to include Selina Kyle because she tested Batman's morals and trust the way Batman tests Lucius and Gordon's. Article here. I think the reason for including Robin in some aspect is the same argument: To tell the complete story of Bruce Wayne/Batman, it would be sacrilegious to the story to leave this portion of the story out. Bruce finally trusts someone else to make the hard decisions, to take over when he can no longer do what needs to be done. To me, it has all been very fitting.

[Donkey Lips]

More Spoilers!

I thought the Robin bit was more of a joke. When the clerk said "You should go by your full name, Robin" and Blake rolled his eyes and kind of smirked like "No fucking way that's happening". But either way, funny inclusion.

Here are some questions I have now that you guys might be able to help me with.

-Blake killed two guys (one with a night stick and one with a ricochet bullet), went into a panic about what he'd done, but then the city blew up and nobody cared. Does anybody remember that?
-It was pretty obvious from the beginning that Talia was the one that escaped and Bane didn't, since they showed flashbacks of a child making the jump, and explained early on that Bane had been beaten so badly he required the mask. I feel like they kind of ruined the surprise with that. Not really a question, just an obvious editing kurfuffle that I was wondering if anybody else noticed.
-If the bomb was set to destroy the city in 5 months time anyway, why wait? I'm guessing Bane and Talia could've just pulled the city apart in one month, giving Bruce less time to escape from the prison, but still giving him the same agony of watching the city crumble. I realize the point was to unravel Gotham from the seams and force Batman to watch it...but 5 months?
-The entire city watched the Bane-stock-hijack, said "Oh shit, they're stealing a ton of money", and then the next day Bruce Wayne is bankrupt...and nobody draws the parallels on that one?

As was said before, Nolan had a huge amount of things to close up, within a time frame of about 2-3 hours, and still had to appease the audience (people who know care/know nothing about the comic, people who are die-hards, and new patrons of the series). I feel like he did an excellent job. I did expect an Inception'esq zinger at the end, but there was nothing. That's fine, he wants to put this trilogy to bed and not get a lot of discussion about "What's happening in the 4th movie?" emails.

Who ever he puts in charge of casting for these films, is the fucking Michael Jordan of Casting Directors though.

[HATE!]

Totally agree with all the positivity in here.  I went in with a weird bar of expectation.  I really wanted (and did) to look at this film without comparing it to the others.  You can't beat a Batman film with the Joker- it's his arch nemesis and after Ledger's version, it was really hard to top.  So I tried to watch this without comparing it, and more as another Batman story.  It's not without flaws, but neither are the first two films.  As a lifelong Batman fan, I was really happy with what Nolan did.  And yes, the casting was probably the best part.