Re: In hindsight what changes would you do - Part 1
I think we're discussing the WhatCulture article correct?
I read that and the ArkhamForum post. They all make convincing arguments and Ill definitely need to rewatch TDKR with those in mind. If all of that was explained more in depth on screen, I'd be "I dig this interpretation." May not dig Batman quitting, but the narrative reasoning is understandable.
But as some screenwriter in the WC comments said, I pay to see what's presented on camera.
I feel as if small details like Bruce getting back to Gotham or Bane not removing the leg brace are fine to gloss over- it's a movie, real life rules are broken. However, the bits about "oh he could've contacted Alfred" or "there's a line where Alfred says 'you never left Batman' ignore the 30 minutes of Rachel talk"- I feel as if those are narrative issues and character development points that really needed to be more fleshed out.
Ive said this earlier, but had Alfred/Batman talked more about the "Your victory has defeated" you instead of "Rachel," I think more people, including myself, would be more accepting. Same kinda goes for the point on the Alfred crying scene- I viewed it as "Bruce you jackass," and the WC guy kinda filled in the blanks of "Maybe he thought the momentary pain was worth the cafe smile." I personally think filling in the blanks for heavy narratives isn't the best in filmmaking. There's a difference between ambiguity and "why did he say X but now he's doing Y?" Just my two cents, but I really think the character motives shouldve been explained more in depth.