Yes, I've realised the forum isn't the way it was a few years ago but I found inspiration somewhere between the pages of my Shakespeare text and the time spent procrastinating instead of actually reading it, and decided to start the thread...

I haven't got too much to say about the plot itself in fear of ruining it for anyone who hasn't seen it yet , but for all those who have seen it (and anyone who knows the plot or just wants to talk about batman ):
-How did you like it?
-Was there that 'expectation vs. reality' issue that a lot of people claim is there or did Bane blow your mind?
-Was it your favourite of the trilogy and do you think it's good that Nolan ended it at three?
-All the villains of batman use completely different tactics to create 'havoc' in Gotham, so in your opinion how does Bane compare to the Joker and Scarecrow? - so who is the 'ultimate' villain(dramatic performance of the amazing heath ledger aside) and why?

Doesn't matter how silent the forums are....we couldn't NOT have a batman thread.

Let's just get it out of the way first: No other villain can compare with Ledge's Joker. I know people around the globe are crying and taking lives over Bane not being as crazy as Joker, but the fact remains that Bane is NOT joker..neither in the comics and not in the movie.

Now, on to the movie itself. Again, let's get one thing clear first, TDK is better than TDKR and TDKR is better than BB (IMO).
Some strong points in favor of TDKR:
* Action set-pieces are brilliantly executed. IMAX worthy, so to say.
* Bale's performance is the best in the series. He gets a lot of screentime here, not as batman but as Bruce Wayne.
* Anne Hathaway makes a briliant cat-woman (never reffered to as such in the film).
* Performances of Levitt, Oldman and Caine are top notch, specially Caine.
* 'The Bat'. Period.

Some points against TDKR:
* Miranda Tate arc. It totally blew. The editors should have just cut it out. Her love angle with Bruce is a farce.
* The way Bane dies..I mean, what the hell was that? Where is the awesomeness?!
* Falling back on the tried and tested nuke angle. It has been done to death. I expected Nolan to come up with something..unique

There is one section of movie goers who think Nolan tried to cramm in too much stuff here. He would have been better served if he split the content into two two hour movies: The dark knight falls and The dark knight rises. What do you guys make of it?

This seems like an expired debate, just like over agent 007. Everyone agreed Sean Connery made the character legendary and everyone looked at his successors with a critical eye because they had to fill some big shoes no kidding.

Haven't seen the last move yet but you guys made me curious. Thank you Xhizors for your input. It brought me back to the roots of the movie and gave me a deeper insight of it. The fact that nothing happens between the Catwoman and Batman is such a gah! spoiler. In a way I sort of expected that from those characters. Well, 'maybe next time', as a hopeless believer that I am.

As for the Joker I would like to point out that my favorite performance was the one done by Jack Nicholson. Sorry, but that guy was BORN for it, the character fit him as a glove. It was one of the more credible villains, if not the most, I have ever seen in a movie to this point.

*goes now and begs cousin to download her the movie*

Ditto that, Xhizors!!

Jack RULZ as le Joker! I don't know but when I think back at that movie, I kinda hated Batman's impersonation. It sorta let me down because I was comparing him to the villain. Jack Nicholson's Joker was marvellous and his representation was 'delicious'.

He'd done such a great job at that point that it made me mad they haven't made Batman rise to my expectations. I am a 'good siding' type of girl and in that part I almost sided with the Joker. He was an effing credible guy.