View Single Post
Old 03-27-2013, 11:02 AM   #971
Marvin's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 19,612
Default Re: In hindsight what changes would you do

Originally Posted by BCDawg97 View Post
Yes, that's exactly what I meant.
Right down to the Bane waring the cowl and ordering room service...

It's been mentioned that Bruce losing Rachel and Batman losing Robin are equivalent catalysts.
I don't think so. For starters, it's conceivable that Bruce could blame himself for Rachel, the public servant's, death in someway, though I don't see Gordan having any right or ground to point the finger in an honest discussion outside of the idea that the Jokers actions are somehow Batman's fault(not true). With Robin, it could very easily be argued that Batman is the direct cause of the minor's death.

1. He let and inspired the minor put on a yellow suit and run around illegally fighting super psycho mass serial not always under his watch(kinda like an assistant DA but not really).
2. Batman could have put Joker down for many many many years prior to Todd's death. It's a fickle moral argument but the point has been made. Unlike in TDK, batman didn't have any chances at the joker before the fact.
3. Even for a partner Batman knew the boy was reckless..etc

As for the other reason.
Gotham hunting batman vs a Presidential order are two different things. For one, Superman isn't a factor in the former. Not that either "should" stop The Batman, but for arguments sake, they aren't the same.

The "Dent Act." Just because the "law" stops representing Justice doesn't mean dick all when it comes to batman's (non present) rogues, what does the likes of the joker think about a dent act? Low level crime is what the cops are good at anyways. In Returns, The Joker(the greatest threat there is) is catatonic, in Rises the joker has lost his ability to scheme and sits in some jail compliant for 8 years. I think on this issue again, you will find a sore spot with fans. But, I suppose it's a more grounded "realistic" route.

Something that sets Returns apart from the nolan trilogy.
"Batman first faces Harvey Dent, who was believed to be cured of Two-Face's evil half after a successful plastic surgery operation. Dent holds the city for ransom with a bomb. When Batman defeats Dent, he discovers that while the man outside resembles the good Dent, the man inside is only the evil half." Two face should have been saved later, how he responds to the Dent act is a missed opportunity.

Returns has Bruce "retire" at 45 and succumb to alcohol(hey, it was written in the 80's). After a life times worth of "crap." TDK has him "retire" in his prime cause "Gotham's street's are clean" and "the love of his life" was killed.
As for the stories themselves DKR vs TDKR...the joker aspect alone is enough to tip the scales imo.

Just think of it this way, if tmr, the DC editors mandated that the "Dent act" was enacted and let's just say Vicky Vale or some non costumed loved died in the books...and the cops were out to get batman. Would that elicit a Batman retirement? And would the readers comply? I personally think this is why the readers find the films falling short.

I don't find the stories all that equivalent, but again, Nolan has that effect.

"I care because filmmakers now make films under crippling security because of parasitic gossip. makes movies worse"
-James Mangold.
Marvin is offline