IGX

I went to the trilogy on IMAX. The extra cheese for IMAX isn't worth it IMO.

If you like the other ones in the series, you'll likely dig this one.

It was annoying to not be able to figure out what Bane was saying about 1/3 of the time.

I'd say 8/10. I thought some of it was overdone...everything the previous movies had, this one had MORE of it (gadgets, melodrama, hero's journey, etc.).

Worth seeing in the theater.

Then again, maybe I was just fried after seeing the first two just before it.

Does he still do the rape voice the whole time? Don't like that.

Fat Cat wrote:Does he still do the rape voice the whole time? Don't like that.

Yes, yes he does. Seeing the progression in raspiness from the first movie to the second is very noticeable. TDKNR may be even more than the second.

What a duck says wrote:

Fat Cat wrote:Does he still do the rape voice the whole time? Don't like that.

Yes, yes he does. Seeing the progression in raspiness from the first movie to the second is very noticeable. TDKNR may be even more than the second.

I didn't like that at all. hard to discern words. IMO, a man's voice need go no lower and raspier than Clint Eastwood to be sufficiently menacing.

It's atrocious, reminds me of a kid trying to buy beer.

What a duck says wrote:I went to the trilogy on IMAX. The extra cheese for IMAX isn't worth it IMO.

If you like the other ones in the series, you'll likely dig this one.

It was annoying to not be able to figure out what Bane was saying about 1/3 of the time.

I'd say 8/10. I thought some of it was overdone...everything the previous movies had, this one had MORE of it (gadgets, melodrama, hero's journey, etc.).

Worth seeing in the theater.

Then again, maybe I was just fried after seeing the first two just before it.

I felt pretty much the exact same way.

I think seeing it directly after the first two, which were amazing, made it very hard to impress.

What a duck says wrote:I went to the trilogy on IMAX. The extra cheese for IMAX isn't worth it IMO.

If you like the other ones in the series, you'll likely dig this one.

It was annoying to not be able to figure out what Bane was saying about 1/3 of the time.

I'd say 8/10. I thought some of it was overdone...everything the previous movies had, this one had MORE of it (gadgets, melodrama, hero's journey, etc.).

Worth seeing in the theater.

Then again, maybe I was just fried after seeing the first two just before it.

Agree, I might knock it to a seven. The plot holes drove me a bit crazy. Anne Hathaway was great, she looked hot and pulled the character off.

IMAX made it harder to make out dialogue. Not recommended.

Otherwise it was great though.

I loved it. Agree about Hathaway, and I was skeptical about her being cast.
I haven't seen the other 2 movies in a while, so I was even thinking about comparisons. Just a real good time.

Good close to the trilogy.

Fat Cat wrote:It's atrocious, reminds me of a kid trying to buy beer.

LMAO! No question about it. =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

I thought it was just OK.
the first 2 were so much better. That plot of the revenge legacy thing with a lost daughter has been done to death.

What's this Batman reload 2015? Anyone knows?

I loved it. There were some holes, but it was so well done I really don't care.

I enjoyed it a lot. Bane was a hell of a villain.

What's it about?

Knights, jackass.

Shapecharge wrote:What's it about?

Porn flick about a well hung black dude. Obviously.

I think the kid who played the first Spiderman should be the fifth Batman. Or maybe that sexy ass Hugh Jackman who plays Wolverine could be the next Batman. I think it really takes a former superhero actor to play a new superhero. They are the only ones who can truly understand the character. Perhaps you could consider someone who's won like 15 Oscars like that Daniel Day Lewis cat. Now he'd be a scary fucking Batman for sure...maybe he could have a wooden eye like he did in Gangs of New York but instead of an eagle it would be the batman symbol. Don't you think a badguy would shit his fucking drawers if he saw that? I am right now I haven't even done anything.

Go cook nigarachi.

Okay.

Shapecharge wrote:I think the kid who played the first Spiderman should be the fifth Batman. Or maybe that sexy ass Hugh Jackman who plays Wolverine could be the next Batman. I think it really takes a former superhero actor to play a new superhero. They are the only ones who can truly understand the character. Perhaps you could consider someone who's won like 15 Oscars like that Daniel Day Lewis cat. Now he'd be a scary fucking Batman for sure...maybe he could have a wooden eye like he did in Gangs of New York but instead of an eagle it would be the batman symbol. Don't you think a badguy would shit his fucking drawers if he saw that? I am right now I haven't even done anything.

*awkwardly walks away*

Enjoyed it, but don't really like how it ended. Especially the Alfred angle.

Anne Hathaway did a good job, but we get none of her back story.
There really was not enough Batman in this movie.

j-cubed wrote:Enjoyed it, but don't really like how it ended. . . .

Yeah. That's not the Batman I know and love. He ain't got no time for no hoes. He gets his sexual satisfaction from punching thugs.

Going to watch Spiderman in a day or two.

Ed Zachary wrote:

j-cubed wrote:Enjoyed it, but don't really like how it ended. . . .

Yeah. That's not the Batman I know and love. He ain't got no time for no hoes. He gets his sexual satisfaction from punching thugs.

Going to watch Spiderman in a day or two.

The director was going for realism; as much as one could expect with the topic being a comic book hero. I loved the scene between Bruce Wayne and his doctor. Where the doc runs down the laundry list of physical issues Bruce Wayne has picked up running around as Batman.

Nolan was just following the logcal conclusion of what would happen to a man that decided to become Batman in a semi-real world scenario. In a comic book, Bruce Wayne never ages (unless it's retcon) and never suffers the same ailments that mortals do. In a comic book, Bruce Wayne never blows out his knees or a shoulder. Even if he does, he's back to jumping off of 60 foot building in the next issue with no problems. Hell, back in the 1990s, DC had Bane break Batmans spine in two and was parraliyed in a wheelchair. A couple of issues later, Bruce is back to being Batman.

I think the idea was, how could Bruce wayne keep pulling off the Batman thing. At one point he would be emotionally and physically wrecked. At one point, he'd have to find a way to get out or burn up.

I loved all three films.

I hear Spiderman sucks donkey dick.

Batboy2/75 wrote:The director was going for realism; as much as one could expect with the topic being a comic book hero. I loved the scene between Bruce Wayne and his doctor. Where the doc runs down the laundry list of physical issues Bruce Wayne has picked up running around as Batman.

Nolan was just following the logical conclusion of what would happen to a man that decided to become Batman in a semi-real world scenario. In a comic book, Bruce Wayne never ages (unless it's retcon) and never suffers the same ailments that mortals do. In a comic book, Bruce Wayne never blows out his knees or a shoulder. Even if he does, he's back to jumping off of 60 foot building in the next issue with no problems. Hell, back in the 1990s, DC had Bane break Batmans spine in two and was parraliyed in a wheelchair. A couple of issues later, Bruce is back to being Batman.

I think the idea was, how could Bruce wayne keep pulling off the Batman thing. At one point he would be emotionally and physically wrecked. At one point, he'd have to find a way to get out or burn up.

I loved all three films.

I hear Spiderman sucks donkey dick.

Totally agree. Loved the doctor scene too. Which reminds me, where can I find a prisoner-physician that can rehab broken backs in 4 months time?