Bruce's dedication vs. his longing for Rachel-OUT OF CHARACTER?

[MAKIEVELLI]

When I saw BB something always bothered me about the fact that Rachel was the one who broke off the potential relationship with Bruce, it always seemed to me like Bruce would have given it all up to be with her. This seems out of character for Batman, one of the most dedicated and obsessed superheroes, if Spidey could walk away from the girl and he is like a soap opera with webs why can't Batman who is supposed to be ten times more dedicated. And in the 2nd movie we have the whole love triangle and again I get the feeling that Bruce would let his crime fighting take a backseat to Rachel if she so allowed it. It almost seems like unrequited love with what I've seen from the trailer and Bats should definitely have more control than that. And what the **** is up with Bats giving up his identity to her? So she wouldn't think of him as a prick anymore? I don't know, they really seem like they are making him needy and trying to humanize him too much. His obsession and dedication should outweight everything IMO

[C. Lee]

When I saw BB something always bothered me about the fact that Rachel was the one who broke off the potential relationship with Bruce, it always seemed to me like Bruce would have given it all up to be with her. This seems out of character for Batman, one of the most dedicated and obsessed superheroes, if Spidey could walk away from the girl and he is like a soap opera with webs why can't Batman who is supposed to be ten times more dedicated. And in the 2nd movie we have the whole love triangle and again I get the feeling that Bruce would let his crime fighting take a backseat to Rachel if she so allowed it. It almost seems like unrequited love with what I've seen from the trailer and Bats should definitely have more control than that. And what the **** is up with Bats giving up his identity to her? So she wouldn't think of him as a prick anymore? I don't know, they really seem like they are making him needy and trying to humanize him too much. His obsession and dedication should outweight everything IMO
So, she broke it off before he did....no big deal. He's obsessed, he would have left her sooner or later anyway. She saw how dedicated he was and knew it wouldn't go where she wanted it to between them.

[slicendice]

perhaps this is out of line...but why is this in the spoiler section?

[Simon Dark]

When I saw BB something always bothered me about the fact that Rachel was the one who broke off the potential relationship with Bruce, it always seemed to me like Bruce would have given it all up to be with her. This seems out of character for Batman, one of the most dedicated and obsessed superheroes, if Spidey could walk away from the girl and he is like a soap opera with webs why can't Batman who is supposed to be ten times more dedicated. And in the 2nd movie we have the whole love triangle and again I get the feeling that Bruce would let his crime fighting take a backseat to Rachel if she so allowed it. It almost seems like unrequited love with what I've seen from the trailer and Bats should definitely have more control than that. And what the **** is up with Bats giving up his identity to her? So she wouldn't think of him as a prick anymore? I don't know, they really seem like they are making him needy and trying to humanize him too much. His obsession and dedication should outweight everything IMO


I agree....although it would naturally be easy (putting yourself in his shoes) to want to give up what you thought originally would be a temporary endeavor for the woman you love, it is much closer to classic Batman lore for his obsession and dedication to the mission to take priority in his life.

[batman_1982]

The story in Batman Mask of the Phantasm comes to mind, which had Bruce almost giving up his quest to fight crime and also the girl(Andrea I believe?) found out that Batman was Bruce.

[Solidus]

When I saw BB something always bothered me about the fact that Rachel was the one who broke off the potential relationship with Bruce, it always seemed to me like Bruce would have given it all up to be with her. This seems out of character for Batman, one of the most dedicated and obsessed superheroes, if Spidey could walk away from the girl and he is like a soap opera with webs why can't Batman who is supposed to be ten times more dedicated. And in the 2nd movie we have the whole love triangle and again I get the feeling that Bruce would let his crime fighting take a backseat to Rachel if she so allowed it. It almost seems like unrequited love with what I've seen from the trailer and Bats should definitely have more control than that. And what the **** is up with Bats giving up his identity to her? So she wouldn't think of him as a prick anymore? I don't know, they really seem like they are making him needy and trying to humanize him too much. His obsession and dedication should outweight everything IMO

And what is wrong with humanizing him? That is the problem with Superman, and why I never liked him as a icon/hero/character. I could never connect with him. He was too god like. Thats why Batman draws so many people, yes he is obsessed with his mission to stop crime.

As it was said earlier in interviews about TDK, is that Bruce is thankful for Harvey Dent, because it looks like Batman may have done his job, and the city is cleaned up, and now some one else on the "lawful/political" side will step in and take the role as the "White Knight". So Batman will no longer be required. Yet of course this all unravels, and if you look at more spoilers including the names of the "tracks" on the soundtrack. It does appear that Bruce does understand he will always be Batman, and the city will always be in need of a hero such as himself. Because he started something that he has to finish. God knows when that will be.

TDK is about Bruce wanting to be normal again, and yet, he does understand later that he can not. With losing Harvey Dent, to the dark side, and people like the Joker causing un-hinged chaos. Bruce understands that he was wrong. One of the songs at the end of the soundtrack is called "I am the Batman!"

That is the point of the story, it does humanize him, yet it makes him a stronger Batman in the end. Instead of just always being the perfect Batman. Which I have never envisioned the character as such, which is why Superman always failed in my opinion in today's world, people don't like connecting with some one that is....beyond them to such an extent.

Like Nolan said, things are going to get worse before they get better. Bruce lets his guard down in hopes for a normal life, and that his mission is complete, but it shows it self, that his job will never be done. And that is the whole journey of TDK, if you take that out, *the stuff you are complaining about* you have no movie.

EDIT: As I live and breath its C. Lee, wow been a long time since I've seen ya around. Howdy to ya.

[BubbaGump]

It's what he does that defines him...

[Tha OG Crip]

i think its fine. the only thing my wife says about the love thing is "but why would she pick harvey dent over bruce" lol!

[gambit420]

I think that's the point of the film..even Bruce says it " I see what I have to become to stop men like him" maybe Joker gets a little TOO personal and just snaps him back into isolation...since he's already lost "something else that was dear to him"...

[Bayou Bat]

He knows he is the Batman. Even if he tried to give it up for Racahel he would be brought back to being the Batman and always feel the guilt for it. He knows it, Rachael knows it, hell we all know it.

[MAKIEVELLI]

He knows he is the Batman. Even if he tried to give it up for Racahel he would be brought back to being the Batman and always feel the guilt for it. He knows it, Rachael knows it, hell we all know it.

Didn't you hear how flimsily he referred to his crimefighting persona at the end of BB? "Its just a mask." Personally, I don't find that very reassuring in the most dedicated man in the world..

[kyuubijavi1]

When I saw BB something always bothered me about the fact that Rachel was the one who broke off the potential relationship with Bruce, it always seemed to me like Bruce would have given it all up to be with her. This seems out of character for Batman, one of the most dedicated and obsessed superheroes, if Spidey could walk away from the girl and he is like a soap opera with webs why can't Batman who is supposed to be ten times more dedicated. And in the 2nd movie we have the whole love triangle and again I get the feeling that Bruce would let his crime fighting take a backseat to Rachel if she so allowed it. It almost seems like unrequited love with what I've seen from the trailer and Bats should definitely have more control than that. And what the **** is up with Bats giving up his identity to her? So she wouldn't think of him as a prick anymore? I don't know, they really seem like they are making him needy and trying to humanize him too much. His obsession and dedication should outweight everything IMO

Well towards the Identity thing he gave it away mostly cause he thought he wouldnt come back just like she did and also gave it away in a very vague way, plus this is a more realistic take on the character so even though he is dedicated to his job he still hopes he can have a normal life which is what I got from the alternate trailer. In which he thinks his war on crime is coming to an end and he can just pick up his life the way he always pictured it before the accedent. Now from some interview that was in the Bruce section he stated that the difference between Batman and other superhero's is that instead of giving up the mantle he is faced into knowing he can never give it up and embraces it. So this little love affair is starting to turn out like Superman Returns in which Bruce thinks he can come back in her life while she is already starting to fall for some one else and it mostly seems like its going to be a huge ego battle between Bruce and Dent.

[Numez]

Come on, no one is looking forward to TDK anyway, so it doesn't really matter.

[C. Lee]

Didn't you hear how flimsily he referred to his crimefighting persona at the end of BB? "Its just a mask." Personally, I don't find that very reassuring in the most dedicated man in the world..

What he meant was....she shouldn't make such a big deal about him dressing up in it and fighting crime (it's just a mask)....because that's now part of his personality.

[C. Lee]

Come on, no one is looking forward to TDK anyway, so it doesn't really matter.

Sounds like you are trying to troll...please leave now.

[Eggyman]

Didn't you hear how flimsily he referred to his crimefighting persona at the end of BB? "Its just a mask." Personally, I don't find that very reassuring in the most dedicated man in the world..

You could go deeper than that though. When he says that, he sounds unsure - not only trying to kid her, but also trying to kid himself. Notice how he didn't argue the point when Rachel pointed out which was his real mask.

[TheBatman072]

You could go deeper than that though. When he says that, he sounds unsure - not only trying to kid her, but also trying to kid himself. Notice how he didn't argue the point when Rachel pointed out which was his real mask.


Yep. He's trying to fool himself into thinking that Batman is just a cape and a cowl he can cast aside. When it goes so much more deeper than that.


And Bruce not wanting to be Batman anymore isn't out of character. Look at Batman: Ego(where I got that bit above from). That's all he wants, is a normal life free from darkness and madness. That's what he's fighting for. He's fighting for a world that doesn't NEED Batman. So he can STOP being Batman.

Just becuase he's really dedicated to his job doesn't mean he wants to DO his job.

Sadly, it DOES go deeper. The Batman persona is a deep, psychological scar in Bruce's pysche, which is why he'll never fully give up being Batman. Even in a world that wouldn't need him.

[Zohan Dvir]

I think the best argument to make is that he's still figuring things out. I know, I know in the comics yada yada yada he's had the obsession since he was a child yada yada yada. But its much more engaging to watch a person with conflicted feelings b/c its a reflection of the real world. The real world is painted in grey and full of inertia. Rachel represents his chance and hope to settle down and lead a normal life. He's gonna be conflicted by that no matter how dedicated he is to his mission. I think TDK has set itself up to really explore this issue.

[MAKIEVELLI]

Yep. He's trying to fool himself into thinking that Batman is just a cape and a cowl he can cast aside. When it goes so much more deeper than that.


And Bruce not wanting to be Batman anymore isn't out of character. Look at Batman: Ego(where I got that bit above from). That's all he wants, is a normal life free from darkness and madness. That's what he's fighting for. He's fighting for a world that doesn't NEED Batman. So he can STOP being Batman.

Just becuase he's really dedicated to his job doesn't mean he wants to DO his job.

Sadly, it DOES go deeper. The Batman persona is a deep, psychological scar in Bruce's pysche, which is why he'll never fully give up being Batman. Even in a world that wouldn't need him.

I don't mind him not wanting to be Batman, I just think its out of character for him to be acting like he would give up the mantle for a woman. I got that impression and I mentioned it in a thread a while ago and a couple of people agreed with me so I know I'm not the only one....

[TheBatman072]

I don't mind him not wanting to be Batman, I just think its out of character for him to be acting like he would give up the mantle for a woman. I got that impression and I mentioned it in a thread a while ago and a couple of people agreed with me so I know I'm not the only one....


It's not just a woman.

Rachel represents everything normal in Bruce's life. He wants it all back.

[xwolverine2]

bruce is just sexually frustrated...

[Gilpesh]

It's not just a woman.

Rachel represents everything normal in Bruce's life. He wants it all back.

Yeah. She isn't just any woman. It's not like in the third one in Nolan's trilogy there's going to be a new woman for Bruce to just want to give Batman up for her.

[CaptainClown]

And what is wrong with humanizing him? That is the problem with Superman, and why I never liked him as a icon/hero/character. I could never connect with him. He was too god like. Thats why Batman draws so many people, yes he is obsessed with his mission to stop crime.

As it was said earlier in interviews about TDK, is that Bruce is thankful for Harvey Dent, because it looks like Batman may have done his job, and the city is cleaned up, and now some one else on the "lawful/political" side will step in and take the role as the "White Knight". So Batman will no longer be required. Yet of course this all unravels, and if you look at more spoilers including the names of the "tracks" on the soundtrack. It does appear that Bruce does understand he will always be Batman, and the city will always be in need of a hero such as himself. Because he started something that he has to finish. God knows when that will be.

TDK is about Bruce wanting to be normal again, and yet, he does understand later that he can not. With losing Harvey Dent, to the dark side, and people like the Joker causing un-hinged chaos. Bruce understands that he was wrong. One of the songs at the end of the soundtrack is called "I am the Batman!"

That is the point of the story, it does humanize him, yet it makes him a stronger Batman in the end. Instead of just always being the perfect Batman. Which I have never envisioned the character as such, which is why Superman always failed in my opinion in today's world, people don't like connecting with some one that is....beyond them to such an extent.

Like Nolan said, things are going to get worse before they get better. Bruce lets his guard down in hopes for a normal life, and that his mission is complete, but it shows it self, that his job will never be done. And that is the whole journey of TDK, if you take that out, *the stuff you are complaining about* you have no movie.

EDIT: As I live and breath its C. Lee, wow been a long time since I've seen ya around. Howdy to ya.
BATS DON'T LOVE! CURSE YOU NOLAN AND YOUR REALISM!
but ya I agree with what you said

[MasterOgami]

And its not so much about Bruce "giving it up for a woman" as it is Bruce believing "the mission" has an ending. When he feels that he's done what he can to rid Gotham of crime, he wants a normal life with Rachel. That's actually been done in books like Monster Men/Mad Monk.

When he said "Batman's just a symbol" in BB, I believe he meant it. In TDK, however, it looks like Bruce is going to realize that its become much more than that and that "the mission" -has- no end.

Edit - What Solidus said. :) Totally missed it up there.

[DiFabio]

bruce is just sexually frustrated...

He should have been a DA instead of a costumed vigilante. Rachel seems to have a thing for them considering she's always trying to get in their pants.

[S.D. Plissken]

perhaps this is out of line...but why is this in the spoiler section?

agreed.

[BatmanFanatic]

When I saw BB something always bothered me about the fact that Rachel was the one who broke off the potential relationship with Bruce, it always seemed to me like Bruce would have given it all up to be with her. This seems out of character for Batman, one of the most dedicated and obsessed superheroes, if Spidey could walk away from the girl and he is like a soap opera with webs why can't Batman who is supposed to be ten times more dedicated. And in the 2nd movie we have the whole love triangle and again I get the feeling that Bruce would let his crime fighting take a backseat to Rachel if she so allowed it. It almost seems like unrequited love with what I've seen from the trailer and Bats should definitely have more control than that. And what the **** is up with Bats giving up his identity to her? So she wouldn't think of him as a prick anymore? I don't know, they really seem like they are making him needy and trying to humanize him too much. His obsession and dedication should outweight everything IMO

Well I agree with your points and this has been brought up a lot on the boards, the change of what we think of as "traditional Bruce Wayne" character. In BB he seemed less obsessed, less willful/dedicated, less focused than in the comics / BTAS and more lead by external events and romance than his own messed up psychology.

Obviously people are going to have differing opinions on whether this change was "good" or "bad" whether it "humanized him" or just made him seem like more of a "pawn" in the story. I didn't really like it personally because I thought it watered down the character. Traditional Bruce Wayne, lets just face it, is a freak of nature. He can NOT let go of the past, he has an absolute and unbreakable IRON will, he doesn't sleep, he doesn't sleep with others (lol...okay, rarely) all so he can be "the Bat." He's unnatural and this IS his superpower. The film tried to make him seem more believable and human and ordinary, it tried to make it seem like this could happen to any unhappy billionaire.

But I have always loved most about the character of Bruce Wayne his unnatural obsession, to the detriment of love, family, peace, sleep, free time, etc... so of course I was a little sad that they didn't choose to go that route in the film. Instead I enjoy it for what it is, a completely different version of the characters beginnings and psychology done in a very visually pleasing way.

[????]

Sounds like you are trying to troll...please leave now.
You couldn't tell he was being sarcastic with the wording of his post? And you're a moderator? Troubling.

It's not just a woman.

Rachel represents everything normal in Bruce's life. He wants it all back.

I agree. The line "Don't make me your only hope for a normal life" by Rachel suggests Bruce is looking for her as a key to a new life, one without Batman. I actually saw this similarly in Spider-Man 2. I would argue those that suggest Peter was leaving Spider-Man for only the sake of a girl would be to oversimplify his situation. I think this is relevant to Bruce's case due to the similarities. Peter commented to Uncle Ben in the daydream/vision sequence that "I want a life of my own", and that he just wanted to be "Peter Parker", (using the image of Uncle Ben and his character as a way to understand what he really wanted). Considering the state of his life as a whole with little appreciation by the public, overwork with bad jobs, falling grades and increasing isolation from his friends as well as the girl he loved, I would say this all led him to make the famous "Spider-Man No More" decision.

Bruce's situation is similar, but slightly different in that it does appear in these films he originally considered Batman a finite solution. Bale was quoted once saying that Bruce will end up realizing in this film that Batman is something that isn't "finite". I agree with the consensus here that this is where the "fully formed" Batman will come in play. I think it's quite useless to argue that Batman isn't acting like Batman in the first film, considering the title is "Batman Begins". He's still learning and developing his character, and it's taking longer than one film.

[totaljim]

Zinnngg..

[Paste Pot Pete]

He's obviously dedicated. He's the Batman.

But he's a different Batman right now, a younger and more naive Batman.

He still thinks his mission is a finite one - that he will somehow eradicate all crime in Gotham and then he can rest in peace and live happily ever after.

TDK is obviously going to be about him realizing that this is impossible and that he is doomed to be Batman forever.

Don't worry, he'll be that cynical, cold-hearted bastard yet. Maybe in movie 3.

But this whole argument is just another example of how fans really nitpick Nolan's series in comparison to the others. Maybe it's a compliment, that they hold it in higher regard; I don't know. All I know is that I rarely ever see anyone complaining about Bruce quitting Batman to be with Chase (the THIRD woman in his film lovelife) or the fact that, according to MOTP (which many call the "definitive Batman movie"), Batman would have never even existed had Andrea just married Bruce. I'd say longing to be with your childhood sweetheart pales in "blasphemy" in comparison to those two.

[Muziko]

When I saw BB something always bothered me about the fact that Rachel was the one who broke off the potential relationship with Bruce, it always seemed to me like Bruce would have given it all up to be with her. This seems out of character for Batman, one of the most dedicated and obsessed superheroes, if Spidey could walk away from the girl and he is like a soap opera with webs why can't Batman who is supposed to be ten times more dedicated. And in the 2nd movie we have the whole love triangle and again I get the feeling that Bruce would let his crime fighting take a backseat to Rachel if she so allowed it. It almost seems like unrequited love with what I've seen from the trailer and Bats should definitely have more control than that. And what the **** is up with Bats giving up his identity to her? So she wouldn't think of him as a prick anymore? I don't know, they really seem like they are making him needy and trying to humanize him too much. His obsession and dedication should outweight everything IMO


It all comes down to what kind of character you are searching for when reading/watching Bruce Wayne. I don't consider his love for Rachel out of character. After all, he IS a human being. Human beings have emotions. It wouldn't be going far to speculate that Bruce Wayne has human emotions (ex: romantic love) and wishes for a "normal" life. In this case, it can be justified by the fact that he and Rachel Dawes are childhood friends. She's been there with him through it all (even found out his secret identity) So she's as dear to him as Alfred (just in a different way). I think "Batman Begins" showed his obsession and dedication when Rachel Dawes made the decision herself not to be with Bruce (even though she loved him) because she saw who he "truly" was. He was hurt, but he accepted it because he knew she was right. End o' story. It seems (from the TDK trailers) that in this chapter of the "Batman" story, Bruce kind of starts feeling hope with Harv around - but we know how that will play out. At the end of the day, he is who he is. He is "The Batman"

[TheBatman072]

You couldn't tell he was being sarcastic with the wording of his post? And you're a moderator? Troubling.


Numez is actually known for that kind of crap.


I don't think I've seen one positive TDK post of his. But then again, I don't pay that much attention to trolls anyway.

[CrimsonDeath]

And its not so much about Bruce "giving it up for a woman" as it is Bruce believing "the mission" has an ending. When he feels that he's done what he can to rid Gotham of crime, he wants a normal life with Rachel. That's actually been done in books like Monster Men/Mad Monk.

When he said "Batman's just a symbol" in BB, I believe he meant it. In TDK, however, it looks like Bruce is going to realize that its become much more than that and that "the mission" -has- no end.

Edit - What Solidus said. :) Totally missed it up there.

You summed it up nicely there too.:up:

And even when he knows the mission has no end... in the comics anyway he longs for:
Selina Kyle
Talia Al Ghul
Silver St. Cloud
Vicky Vale
Vesper Fairchild
Sasha Bordeaux
Whoever they have him with now....

That is an important aspect of his personality that is perfectly justifiable being explored in the movie... he longs for something normal and good, but then realizes that he needs to give it up, because his psychological debility fears it, and at the same time his psychological strength knows "love" is an obstacle to achieving the mission. At the same time, it is both difficult and necessary, and even welcomed, to give up such love. If it didn't mean that much to him in the first place it wouldn't mean anything as "literary fodder" to give it up.

[boroboro]

Maybe they did want Rachel to break it off with Bruce just so they can have the love-triangle angle in TDK. Maybe Bruce wouldve broken up with Rachel if she didnt first, and the fact that she does is kinda bothering him. I think thats a very humane reaction and I have no problems with it.

[Aidan2209]

Didn't you hear how flimsily he referred to his crimefighting persona at the end of BB? "Its just a mask." Personally, I don't find that very reassuring in the most dedicated man in the world..

Bruce actually says, "Batman's just a symbol, Rachael." Rachael says 'mask', but she isn't referring to Batman, she's referring to Bruce. He is Batman now. That is her standing witness to his total dedication to his crusade. And his reaction (he nods and looks resigned, in case you forgot) tells us that he knows she's right.

[ultimatefan]

As has been referred to in a bunch of comics, there´s nothing Bruce wants more than to find out that Batman has become unnecessary, that Gotham is a safe city. The day that happens, there´s nothing he´d want more than to go for a normal life with a woman. And sometimes, even though he can never drop his mission, those two urges conflict with each other.

[mxn36]

He's obviously dedicated. He's the Batman.

But he's a different Batman right now, a younger and more naive Batman.

He still thinks his mission is a finite one - that he will somehow eradicate all crime in Gotham and then he can rest in peace and live happily ever after.

TDK is obviously going to be about him realizing that this is impossible and that he is doomed to be Batman forever.

Don't worry, he'll be that cynical, cold-hearted bastard yet. Maybe in movie 3.

But this whole argument is just another example of how fans really nitpick Nolan's series in comparison to the others. Maybe it's a compliment, that they hold it in higher regard; I don't know. All I know is that I rarely ever see anyone complaining about Bruce quitting Batman to be with Chase (the THIRD woman in his film lovelife) or the fact that, according to MOTP (which many call the "definitive Batman movie"), Batman would have never even existed had Andrea just married Bruce. I'd say longing to be with your childhood sweetheart pales in "blasphemy" in comparison to those two.


Exactly :up:

[Andrex]

How quickly we forget Mask of the Phantasm.

[TheBatman072]

This thread is silly and overly nit-picky.