badhat wrote: The Emperor's Son wrote:
clutchcity wrote:really wish we could get a batman beyond-esque sequel with bruce mentoring blake, helping him overcome his very basic training, but i know it'll never happen
this is the only the superhero film i'd anticipate seeing but yeah probably never going to happen.
everyone saying this shoulda been two movies is right and the break should have been at the stadium explosion and most of the second movie should have been this
But then it wouldn't be a surprise. It's like when everyone wanted Crispin Glover as the Joker or Depp for the Riddler. Nolan never goes for the obvious like that. Insularity can be a dangerous thing (Burton), but when we get Batman movies like this, hey, whatever. The Talia reveal was obvious to me, but not most of the people in the audience, so much. And, you know, I don't think my guess matters; that's neither here nor there. Which isn't to say that the literal twist of the knife was dampened by that when it happened. It carried enough impact on its own as a scene imo. I felt it was telegraphed well, from Bruce's perspective. You've already met crazy, now meet crazier.
Anyway, that's getting tangential. I don't think Knightfall's nearly interesting enough to stand on its own. I'm sure I've mentioned this up-thread, but it's a mere footnote in Bat-history, an editorially driven sales stunt a la The Death of Superman. No Man's Land is the superior of the two arcs, obv. I just can't see decompressing either one out to movie lengths. Like brooks said, Nolan's trilogy isn't perfect to the purist in me; but, part of the kick I get out of it is how much of the mythos Nolan has drawn from without adapting or even borrowing from one arc at time. The three movies are really all over the map, canonically, which is a lot more than I can say for the meandering, flimsy plots of the Burton movies.
Part of why the climax and the way all the loose ends were tied at the end worked for me was because, even having called the Talia betrayal from the moment Cotillard was cast, I still couldn't get a sense of Nolan's endgame. I didn't see the "death" of Batman ahead, or the winking Robin moment coming until Blake tried using his full name. So I think it was ballsy of Nolan to wrap everything up with one movie. It carried a lot more momentum that way; much more satisfying to me. It's like the anti-two-parter, which I think is fairly unique these days.