Originally Posted by henzINNIT
... errr exactly? "Nolan's Batman" wasn't as compelling as the Batman he was adapting. He has the right to alter the character in his film, and I have the right to criticise his decision if it harms the core of the character.
So then, as I mentioned...dislike the entire characterization of all three films and not solely TDKR.
I only wish it had more time to develop, but I am content with what we have in the film. You seem like you just didn't like the lack-of the film had, lol.
It is indeed an issue that has roots in the first two films, but it wasn't a problem for me until TDKR gave us a complacent Bruce. It's all well and good targeting the mobs while they're operating, but far less interesting showing a man sat on his arse after he apparently (unbelievably) achieved it.
Compare the end of TDK - where Batman is cemented as the self-sacrificing hero, running because he elected to be chased and vilified for his city - to the opening of TDKR - where he apparently got home, kicked off his boots, sat down and grew a beard.
But what can Bruce even do as Batman when the job is done? I do not want to see a Batman just running building after building just to see if he can do a job like chasing cats out of trees(that's for Superman to do
). He retired The Batman and focused on making everything else in Gotham safer by working on that energy project which he then had to shut down.
And Nolan had said for the ending of TDK to work, something good had to come out of it. With the mobs taken out of the system, why would Batman want to use of GCPD's time in trying to hunt him down when there's zero reason?