Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Dark Knight Rises was okay, am I the only one who thought so? I'm sorry but this Nolan guy, the film maker who bought us the last 3 Batmans and Inception builds these long drawn out scenes and closes them with big epic action scenes and to me just doesn't make a great film. But he sure does bring in box office with this movie and his rest..... So am I the only one that thinks this? The studio spends over 100 million dollars on a movie and its just the best movie in the world huh. Now that I think about it, Nolan reminds me of Michael Bay but his movies aren't as fun. At the end of the day both these guys bring in the big bucks with their over 100 million dollar not so good epics.
It's sacrilege to put Michael Bay in the same line as Nolan.
Nolan is the new Raoul Walsh or Will Wyler, if you will. There need to be film makers who make epics with such intensity.
Actually to me Bay is better, Nolan films are dry, somber, and dreary and pretty much have the same music throughout the film. Bay does a better job in cooking it up with couple different ingredients, Nolan just uses the above to make so called great film.
LOL! Michael Bay makes mindless, soulless, action flicks and basically ruins anything he touches. Did you really compare him to Nolan who puts more intelligence in a 5 minute scene than Bay has used in his entire career? Wow, dude...
Actually to me Bay is better, Nolan films are dry, somber, and dreary and pretty much have the same music throughout the film. Bay does a better job in cooking it up with couple different ingredients, Nolan just uses the above to make so called great film.
Wow I have never heard such a horrible comment. Michael Bay is one of the worst. I don't think the man even cares about his work, he just knows he is getting $$$$ for making loud, obonixious, stupid movies.
Pardon me, but Bay movies are mindless entertainment for those who don't even have a mind.....
My only complaint is that it became a large scale human disaster movie rather than a batman centric film.
I hoped for more sequences and theatrics with that awesome bat bike.
Also, Marion Cotillard didn't carry on Bane's intensity as the villain. While it was a surprise, it felt like the villain got wussified in a jiff.
This is where the Joker was a class act. He totally owned the movie. And Two-face was a perfect surprise villain with a good twist. The surprise villain in Talia al Ghul fell a little short.
My only complaint is that it became a large scale human disaster movie rather than a batman centric film.
I hoped for more sequences and theatrics with that awesome bat bike.
Also, Marion Cotillard didn't carry on Bane's intensity as the villain. While it was a surprise, it felt like the villain got wussified in a jiff.
This is where the Joker was a class act. He totally owned the movie. And Two-face was a perfect surprise villain with a good twist. The surprise villain in Talia al Ghul fell a little short.
Totally agree with you there, it was more a large scale human disaster movie with Batman in there. Thats probably why I didn't like it much.....Batman was out of commission by mid film and I was thinking no, no, what are you doing!!!
And sorry you guys about comparing Michael Bay to Nolan. My point is both of these guys knock it out the park in the box office. Bay's movies are indeed mindless but Nolan has these long dragged out scenes with almost the same mood in all of them and finishes them with a big action scene, and scenes are not that creative either just 'big'. Anyway, Nolan and Bay both of them going to give you an action film, Nolan is going to do it slow, Bay gets right to the point through Bay's blockbuster playbook. Which is better? I guess Nolan because people think his movies are epic.....not to me, they are just 'big' movies trying to be epic.
I thought it was fun, and it was a good conclusion to this Batman series. I haven't delved into the comics, but I am a Batman fan, and having read up on some of the story lines, they stayed pretty true to Batman mythologies. (Sorry for the run on sentence.)
Totally agree with you there, it was more a large scale human disaster movie with Batman in there. Thats probably why I didn't like it much.....Batman was out of commission by mid film and I was thinking no, no, what are you doing!!!
And sorry you guys about comparing Michael Bay to Nolan. My point is both of these guys knock it out the park in the box office. Bay's movies are indeed mindless but Nolan has these long dragged out scenes with almost the same mood in all of them and finishes them with a big action scene, and scenes are not that creative either just 'big'. Anyway, Nolan and Bay both of them going to give you an action film, Nolan is going to do it slow, Bay gets right to the point through Bay's blockbuster playbook. Which is better? I guess Nolan because people think his movies are epic.....not to me, they are just 'big' movies trying to be epic.
Not all of Nolan's films are actions films or even have action scenes. Not all of his films are blockbusters either. Bay is all about making blockbusters and making as much money as possible whereas Nolan wants to make a good movie and sometimes they turn into blockbusters.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
