...ould given the level of breakdown and detail you went to, to get your point across however invalid and very farfetched you have made it out to be. I suggest you put the kettle on whilst I try to convey just how wrong you are when you pick a apart one of the greatest movie trilogies of the last 20 years. Reading through your article, I can see the disappointment in every sentence, but your disappointment comes through opinion or your comic book imagination not being 'fantasy' enough for you. A lot of your comments seemed to be backed up by pure disappointment at things such as lack of explosions or lack of video game type screenplay. This is confirmed by your ultra loyalty to the DC comic book strips and animations which you so often reference in your reviews. I will add at this point; your reasoning's and arguments for this movie being poor due to not enough Good Guy/Bad Guy shit, really does not help to compel any theory you may have stumbled to. Christopher Nolan brought out a new dimension to the well known Batman franchise. He gave Batman edge, virtuosity and mystique whilst giving Bruce Wayne an aloof yet subtle dynamic which added contrast to the two personalities shared by the same body. A lot of your disappointment seems to stem from the fact that the comic books were not purist enough. Erm, hate to break it to you but if Nolan had merely mirrored exagerated Gotham City magazines; you'd have a film that no one could relate to. We are humans; we relate to character development; emotion; desire; hatred; evil. We dont purely get excited by a goofy clown wearing make up wielding a shotgun. Nolan made the Batman series believable and enabled so many of us to develop an onscreen repoire with the character that Bale adopts so well. There is more to movies than guns, machines, detective instinct and good/evil. Nolan encapsulated morals, justice and human achievement through these movies. You cannot say an entire trilogy is bad because Batman didnt beat up enough criminals using ALL 128 skills he inherited from the league of shadows.... Come on for God's sake! The whole point of this trilogy was to transpire it from the pages of the comic book and give civilization a hero to believe in and be inspired by. He cleverly related terrorist character antics to that of modern day peace time which fuelled angst in the viewer, urging the desire to see Batman triumph over this even greater. You pick apart minor little indifference's like the introduction of Rachel Dawes and belittle her character because she doesn't wield a gun or shoot 'bad guyz'. You completely missed the point of this character; it was not in any shape or form to give Batman a female ally; it was to convey the innocence and humanity in Bruce Wayne; in that he too would one day seek a normal life away from the criminal underworld of Gotham, oh but sorry because the comic books keep GC as a thug crimeworld, Batman cant be 'human' and must just beat up thugs and live in a cave, because that's going to appeal to every single audience isnt it? The character of Rachel symbolises the burning reminder of why Bruce became Batman in the first place; to protect those he cares about!! Also, again you criticise the roles of Lucius Fox and Alfred because they did 'everything' for Batman? Again, what audience would believe that Batman could do EVERYTHING. I feel like I am insulting your intelligence by frequently reminding you that a comic book ripped page for page onto the big screen just DOESN'T work and thus needs character interaction and assistance for it to be believable, otherwise you have just got a lame Terminator re write from 1990. You also tore into the portrayal of Harvey Dent because 'shock horror' the comic wasnt replicated. Again, Nolans character of Dent was supposed to give citizens a believable and sane image of justice being handled effieciently in the eyes of the law. The transition of Dent down to the Jokers swaying and the loss of his wife to be, all create a toxic mix of a bad guy who certainly leaves an imprint on the viewers of the 2nd film. I'm guessing, because he didnt bulldoze a bank with a stolen digger, he isn't 'evil' enough for you? As the end of the Dark Knight suggests; The Joker won, because he destroyed the symbol of good in Gotham that was the man on the street and not a caped crusader. Your comments about the suit and the way Batman talk, are again such weak arguments in desperation to convince yourself that this was a poor movie. Not quick enough? Not Ninja enough? chewing on cotton buds? Please... Such dreadful crtieria to try and justify opinions. True cinema lovers walk out of movies feeling touched by character relation and onscreen entertainment that shapes the unpredictable and has you on the edge of your seat. Anyone walking out of a movie feeling gutted because the Bat suit wasnt flexible enough... Jeez, go back to Xbox. To summarise, and the fact you ranked animated movies above this trilogy speaks volumes about what you look for in a movie. Big guns, explosions, bad guys that just have real menacing costumes and kill people for nothing and an A to B plot to purely satisfy your bizarre imagination. Your review really was lacking in substance as much as it was in truth. Nolan completely revitalised a series that WB 10 years earlier had really messed with and brought it back to a believable, relatable heroic masterpiece.