Am I the only one that feels like TDKR prevents Nolan's trilogy from being perfect?

[pr0xyt0xin]

Originally Posted by Deserana

We know where he is they just didn't feel the need to say it. Practically the reason Bruce is the way he is in TDKR is down to The Joker. This isn't aimed at you but I find it funnt how Nolan is sometimes accused of handholding an audience but some seem to not see that it was The Joker's fault mainly for his retirement.

Definitely cool to think about. Batman had to retire because The Joker assured him "you and I are destined to do this forever." Still can't quite rescind the bullet point cuz I can't help but feel Ledger's Joker was supposed to be the judge in TDKR. In other words, i just feel like with the Joker somewhere still alive in the background that A. Batman could NEVER retire and B. No other villain (even Bane or Talia) could outdo him. And one way to have perfected that was by handholding us into knowing Bane was more powerful than Joker.

I could go on about this for a while, but I'm probably just talking to myself :P

[pr0xyt0xin]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

TDKR, to me, definitely feels like a film that was meant to be made. Nolan's not some director that would return just for money; he would've only retuned if he found an idea for a third film as he's mentioned before and he found that story. I mean, this has been the best 3rd installment of any CBM before and it seems like people are dogging on it as if it's like Spider-Man 3 or X-Men 3, when it's simply not. It has its flaws, but so did The Dark Knight. And I'm not afraid to admit that, but Nolan's entire trilogy is breathtaking that I can look past those mistakes, but that's just me.

done and done.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by The Joker

I'm not saying he definitely was tracking a criminal like Selina, but lets face it is it unlikely he had not had a similar situation before? A break in at a millionaire's mansion? Or perhaps keeping up to speed on the events in Gotham. The cleaning up of the streets via the Dent Act. Who was being picked up and locked away. Keeping track of all the organized crime members going down.

There is many reasons why he could have been in that cave before without being Batman.

Of course there could have been a ton of reasons for Bruce to pop in the Batcave, trying to see if something bad is going down in Gotham for Batman to be needed, but that doesn't take away that Batman could have very well stuck around for at least six more months or maybe another whole year until the Dent Act was established and put into law.

Nostalgia in that he's mentally stuck in the past and can't move on. As Alfred said he just sits around living in the past (missing Rachel) and waiting for things to go bad again.

But we already know Bruce can't move on. That's a part of TDKR that they focused on, Bruce never being able to move on. But that doesn't mean Bruce had to visit the Batcave to do so.

But this brings us back to the whole point of when was the Dent Act created? You claim it couldn't have happened shortly after Dent's death. Well a dozen other legal related things that happened in Nolan's movies could never happen in real life either.

But we heard Blake say the inmates in Blackgate say they were locked up under the Dent Act for 8 years. Nolan also said the 8 year gap is representative of Batman's retirement;

Christopher Nolan: The end of ‘The Dark Knight’ left the characters in a pretty interesting place. Because we’re trying to make one unified story here, so it’s not another episode, another Batman episode, if you like. For me, that meant really trying to be true to where the characters were left. And Bruce Wayne, as Batman, has made a rather large sacrifice at the end of ’The Dark Knight.’ For that to mean something, he really has to have succeeded in a sense, in his mission. He has to have a Gotham that at least superficially doesn’t need Batman anymore. And that leaves him frozen. And the eight year period is about showing that he’s retired in a sense, that he’s hung up his cape and his cowl. But he hasn’t been able to move on, he’s stuck.

http://www.flicksandbits.com/2012/07...t-rises/28690/

And I brought up the idea that the low-life thugs Dent put away in TDK could have been accounted for as well under the new Dent Act once it's established, so Blake could have just counted up once these criminals were sent to prison or what have you which would still be eight years.

It was a larger victory than that. Besides the Joker's capture and half of the city's criminals being locked up, between Joker and Two Face they had Maroni, Gambol, and the Chechen all murdered.

Joker had essentially taken over the underworld with plans to bring in a better class of criminal. Joker was caught.

Good point, but I just don't see the ending of TDK as the ending of Batman. Just too many things, imo, point to Bruce still being Batman for a while.

[BatmanBeyond]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

Heh, I buy it

Also...for me Barsad was like The Chechen of this film. Just that cool secondary bad guy who's fun to watch every time he's on screen. Josh Stewart did a great job with the little he was given.

I liked Stewart as Barsad too and thought it was cool how in awe with Bane he seemed to be. I still found it funny how his middle-easternish accent from the prologue slipped into a more American/British one during that bridge scene with that soldier from the government forces though.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

why bother?

Why bother indeed. I understand the film perfectly fine. I just don't understand what your talking about because I haven't read your posts. But more to the point, like you said, we all have our own views of the film. So there really isn't any point in trying to bother to convince me otherwise, as I have no intention of trying to change your mind. To each their own.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

Of course there could have been a ton of reasons for Bruce to pop in the Batcave, trying to see if something bad is going down in Gotham for Batman to be needed, but that doesn't take away that Batman could have very well stuck around for at least six more months or maybe another whole year until the Dent Act was established and put into law.

Could have but didn't for several reasons;

1. The movie says Batman's not been sighted since the night Dent died
2. Nolan said the 8 year gap was representative of Batman's retirement
3. Nolan says on the special features of the blu ray that the injury he sustained that requires a cane is from the fall he had with Dent at the end of TDK. Can you see Batman being active in crime fighting with an injury like that? You see him limping away at the end of TDK when the Cops are chasing him. Clearly the injury just deteriorated over the 8 years.

But we already know Bruce can't move on. That's a part of TDKR that they focused on, Bruce never being able to move on. But that doesn't mean Bruce had to visit the Batcave to do so.

I'm not saying it does. I'm saying that's one of several possible and more likely reasons. This is all conjecture on my behalf.

And I brought up the idea that the low-life thugs Dent put away in TDK could have been accounted for as well under the new Dent Act once it's established, so Blake could have just counted up once these criminals were sent to prison or what have you which would still be eight years.

You brought up the idea. No offense, but that's all it is, an idea. Whereas we have direct quotes from the movie and the director substantiating Batman's retirement for 8 years and the Dent Act keeping men locked up for 8 years.

It doesn't add up in the face of what we're told.

Good point, but I just don't see the ending of TDK as the ending of Batman. Just too many things, imo, point to Bruce still being Batman for a while.

Trust me, Anno, I would have LOVED if Batman did not throw in the towel at the end of TDK, because the last thing I was thinking when I saw TDK's ending was Batman was riding off on the Bat-Pod for retirement after just being christened a Dark Knight. You'll recall I am a big critic of that.

But I have to concede that isn't how it played given everything we're told. Both in the movie and by the movie makers.

[MAKAVELI25]

Originally Posted by The Joker

Could have but didn't for several reasons;

1. The movie says Batman's not been sighted since the night Dent died
2. Nolan said the 8 year gap was representative of Batman's retirement
3. Nolan says on the special features of the blu ray that the injury he sustained that requires a cane is from the fall he had with Dent at the end of TDK. Can you see Batman being active in crime fighting with an injury like that? You see him limping away at the end of TDK when the Cops are chasing him. Clearly the injury just deteriorated over the 8 years.

Whilst I definitely like the idea of Batman fighting on for a few more months, there's obviously more proof in the movie of him retiring the night Dent died than the opposite. How anyone can deny this is ludicrous

[BatLobsterRises]

IMO the reason this is being debated and the reason the movie (and Nolan himself, actually) does not cleanly state "Batman has been retired since the night Dent died" is to streamline the story for the audience and not present too convoluted a backstory, without infringing upon the imaginations of people who'd like to believe Batman might have stayed quietly active for a short period after.

A line like "the last confirmed sighting" remains ambiguous to me in nature.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by The Joker

Could have but didn't for several reasons;

1. The movie says Batman's not been sighted since the night Dent died
2. Nolan said the 8 year gap was representative of Batman's retirement
3. Nolan says on the special features of the blu ray that the injury he sustained that requires a cane is from the fall he had with Dent at the end of TDK. Can you see Batman being active in crime fighting with an injury like that? You see him limping away at the end of TDK when the Cops are chasing him. Clearly the injury just deteriorated over the 8 years.

1.) So 'confirmed sighting' means firmly that Batman was never in Gotham City ever since the night of Dent's murder? Batman could have never continued to protect the city as much as he can in the shadows knowing that the police will be on his tail if he's ever sighted by the police? And if you ask what's so wrong with having the police chasing him as it happened in BB, then I will bring up the fact that it's something unnecessary. Batman doesn't need a huge police chase, especially since the police didn't even care about Bane while they chased Batman.

2.) Nolan made the generalization of the eight years having passed TDK's events. Nothing true about Bruce actually being retired for a total of eight years.

3.) The injury could have definitely deteriorated over the eight years, but I never said Batman stayed around for eight years. Bruce could have stayed as Batman until he couldn't take the injury anymore. My dad has had a similar injury that only got worse through years, but he only recently retired and signed up for disability like two years ago and before that, continued to work at a hardware store.

You make it seem like you have justifiable proof that Bruce just left the cape and cowl after Dent died, but nothing really proves such until someone speaks to Christopher Nolan and asks him for sure.

I'm not saying it does. I'm saying that's one of several possible and more likely reasons. This is all conjecture on my behalf.

Definitely the best possible reason to you, but I don't see it as a reason when he has everything he has, for nostalgia sake, in his mansion.

You brought up the idea. No offense, but that's all it is, an idea. Whereas we have direct quotes from the movie and the director substantiating Batman's retirement for 8 years and the Dent Act keeping men locked up for 8 years.

It doesn't add up in the face of what we're told.

No offense taken as I already said it's an idea, lol.

But, I've already said my point of view countless of times on both of those mentions regarding the eight years. Two hard-headed posters really get nowhere, huh? Lol.

Trust me, Anno, I would have LOVED if Batman did not throw in the towel at the end of TDK, because the last thing I was thinking when I saw TDK's ending was Batman was riding off on the Bat-Pod for retirement after just being christened a Dark Knight. You'll recall I am a big critic of that.

But I have to concede that isn't how it played given everything we're told. Both in the movie and by the movie makers.

And I disagree; I believe Batman didn't just give up, but once again, to each their own. And I suppose that's why I can handle certain parts of TDKR because I view it differently than the people who seem to not enjoy TDKR so much.

Originally Posted by MAKAVELI25

Whilst I definitely like the idea of Batman fighting on for a few more months, there's obviously more proof in the movie of him retiring the night Dent died than the opposite. How anyone can deny this is ludicrous

I'd rather be...

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

IMO the reason this is being debated and the reason the movie (and Nolan himself, actually) does not cleanly state "Batman has been retired since the night Dent died" is to streamline the story for the audience and not present too convoluted a backstory, without infringing upon the imaginations of people who'd like to believe Batman might have stayed quietly active for a short period after.

A line like "the last confirmed sighting" remains ambiguous to me in nature.

Which is probably Nolans way of not getting pinned down or alienating segments of fan boys. It's kinda why I was saying this film causes so much debate as there are lot of things unclear. My opinion is he retired after dents death. I don't like it, but that's the way they laid it out. If not, I just need to hear one line of dialogue from anyone saying batman was out and about.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

IMO the reason this is being debated and the reason the movie (and Nolan himself, actually) does not cleanly state "Batman has been retired since the night Dent died" is to streamline the story for the audience and not present too convoluted a backstory, without infringing upon the imaginations of people who'd like to believe Batman might have stayed quietly active for a short period after.

A line like "the last confirmed sighting" remains ambiguous to me in nature.

Exactly!

[Anita18]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

IMO the reason this is being debated and the reason the movie (and Nolan himself, actually) does not cleanly state "Batman has been retired since the night Dent died" is to streamline the story for the audience and not present too convoluted a backstory, without infringing upon the imaginations of people who'd like to believe Batman might have stayed quietly active for a short period after.

A line like "the last confirmed sighting" remains ambiguous to me in nature.

Doesn't Daggett say, "8 years, and he has to pick tonight?" That says to me that he really was gone for 8 years, or at the very least, hasn't done a big job like the stock exchange for that long.

[Ryan]

I think though you have to look at the implication of that line. Could batman still have been out there? Sure. Could he have also battled the joker again and could dent still be alive. Why not? The whole point of Blake saying that, if we are to believe Nolan isn't a hack, is to let the audience know batman had quit that night. Otherwise, why not just say hardly anyone or very few have seen him.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by Ryan

I think though you have to look at the implication of that line. Could batman still have been out there? Sure. Could he have also battled the joker again and could dent still be alive. Why not? The whole point of Blake saying that, if we are to believe Nolan isn't a hack, is to let the audience know batman had quit that night. Otherwise, why not just say hardly anyone or very few have seen him.

That right there just gives me a reason to ignore what you have to say.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by MAKAVELI25

Whilst I definitely like the idea of Batman fighting on for a few more months, there's obviously more proof in the movie of him retiring the night Dent died than the opposite. How anyone can deny this is ludicrous

There's always one

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

1.) So 'confirmed sighting' means firmly that Batman was never in Gotham City ever since the night of Dent's murder?

Absolutely. Unless you have some practical alternative suggestions about what a limping leg Batman would be doing out in Gotham after that night?

If your response is catching criminals, then that would be a confirmed sighting, since those captured criminals could substantiate Batman was still around.

Batman could have never continued to protect the city as much as he can in the shadows knowing that the police will be on his tail if he's ever sighted by the police?

How does he protect Gotham from the shadows?

And if you ask what's so wrong with having the police chasing him as it happened in BB, then I will bring up the fact that it's something unnecessary. Batman doesn't need a huge police chase, especially since the police didn't even care about Bane while they chased Batman.

I wasn't going to bring that up, but since you have I'll gladly use that since Bruce was not bothered by being chased after either of these chases with the Police.

2.) Nolan made the generalization of the eight years having passed TDK's events. Nothing true about Bruce actually being retired for a total of eight years.

You're putting words in Nolan's mouth by saying he made a generalization. How can it be a generalization when he says the 8 years is the retirement period? He hung up the cape and cowl.

It's spelled out simply. No generalization. No double meaning.

3.) The injury could have definitely deteriorated over the eight years, but I never said Batman stayed around for eight years. Bruce could have stayed as Batman until he couldn't take the injury anymore.

What kind of idiot tries to fight crime with a handicap like a limp?

You're just conjecturing again, and your what if scenario sounds so ludicrous. Batman going around the rooftops and taking on criminals with a limp.

Ridiculous scenario I cannot even possible envision of Nolan's Batman.

My dad has had a similar injury that only got worse through years, but he only recently retired and signed up for disability like two years ago and before that, continued to work at a hardware store.

No offense, but working in a hardware store, and running around rooftops and fighting criminals is a bit more physically stressful on a man than working in a hardware store.

It doesn't take years of ninja training to do that.

You make it seem like you have justifiable proof that Bruce just left the cape and cowl after Dent died, but nothing really proves such until someone speaks to Christopher Nolan and asks him for sure.

Someone already has. There's his quote.

Why you think he's generalizing is beyond me, except I suspect it's just an attempt to make your argument have some validity to it.

Definitely the best possible reason to you, but I don't see it as a reason when he has everything he has, for nostalgia sake, in his mansion.

What Batman memorabilia does he have in Wayne Manor?

No offense taken as I already said it's an idea, lol.

But, I've already said my point of view countless of times on both of those mentions regarding the eight years. Two hard-headed posters really get nowhere, huh? Lol.

Maybe, but it would help if one particular hard headed poster could back up his theories with something a bit more concrete like I have

[Ryan]

Anno, you think everything I post is directed at you..lol. I hope you do ignore my posts..it's what ive wanted all along.lol

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by Anita18

Doesn't Daggett say, "8 years, and he has to pick tonight?" That says to me that he really was gone for 8 years, or at the very least, hasn't done a big job like the stock exchange for that long.

Exactly. Daggett is just another character who says the obvious.

[MAKAVELI25]

Originally Posted by Ryan

I don't like it, but that's the way they laid it out. If not, I just need to hear one line of dialogue from anyone saying batman was out and about.

Re-quoted for emphasis

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by Ryan

Which is probably Nolans way of not getting pinned down or alienating segments of fan boys. It's kinda why I was saying this film causes so much debate as there are lot of things unclear. My opinion is he retired after dents death. I don't like it, but that's the way they laid it out. If not, I just need to hear one line of dialogue from anyone saying batman was out and about.

You're in for a long wait for that one

Originally Posted by Ryan

I think though you have to look at the implication of that line. Could batman still have been out there? Sure. Could he have also battled the joker again and could dent still be alive. Why not? The whole point of Blake saying that, if we are to believe Nolan isn't a hack, is to let the audience know batman had quit that night. Otherwise, why not just say hardly anyone or very few have seen him.

Exactly. That way it lets us know Batman did not throw in the towel directly after that night. But we didn't get that. We did get many lines that outright say it's been 8 years since anyone has seen Batman in Gotham.

No getting around that. Everything else is just baseless conjecturing.

[TheBat812]

I'd have to say that given that special features explanation about Bruce's injury from Nolan (which I hadn't heard, but is a big piece of info regarding this) as well as the few lines from the movie do indicate that Bruce put the cowl away after that night. It's a very fitting idea for Nolan. This is what Nolan most probably intended, although I think he purposefully did not include too much proof of that in the film to allow that ambiguity for the fans.

[BatLobsterRises]

Originally Posted by Ryan

I think though you have to look at the implication of that line. Could batman still have been out there? Sure. Could he have also battled the joker again and could dent still be alive. Why not? The whole point of Blake saying that, if we are to believe Nolan isn't a hack, is to let the audience know batman had quit that night. Otherwise, why not just say hardly anyone or very few have seen him.

The point of the line is to show that to Gotham at large, Batman has been gone for 8 years and that he has become a mysterious legend to them. It doesn't really effect Bruce Wayne's journey one way or another if he's been gone a full 8 years or 7 years a 9 months, etc. The end result for him is still the same...he's stopped being Batman for a very long time, long enough for him to be older and rusty.

I think Nolan understands that it's not natural for the audience to assume that Batman was going to retire based on the end of TDK, so he gave himself a few tiny openings for people to fill in some of the story for themselves. This is 8 years of the main character's life we're talking about, there should be some room for nuance.

Originally Posted by Anita18

Doesn't Daggett say, "8 years, and he has to pick tonight?" That says to me that he really was gone for 8 years, or at the very least, hasn't done a big job like the stock exchange for that long.

Well, definitely not. I don't think anyone's trying to argue that Batman has pulled anything huge since TDK, only that he's a man capable of operating from the shadows and might have done just that if he felt he needed to in the time leading up to the passing of the Dent Act.

Originally Posted by TheBat812

although I think he purposefully did not include too much proof of that in the film to allow that ambiguity for the fans.

I agree. I think in Nolan's mind, it's 8 years, but I thought he handled it delicately.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

The point of the line is to show that to Gotham at large, Batman has been gone for 8 years and that he has become a mysterious legend to them. It doesn't really effect Bruce Wayne's journey one way or another if he's been gone a full 8 years or 7 years a 9 months, etc. The end result for him is still the same...he's stopped being Batman for a very long time, long enough for him to be older and rusty.

Which begs the question why one or two are so adamant to believe this. What is a one or two month difference going to make?

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by TheBat812

I'd have to say that given that special features explanation about Bruce's injury from Nolan (which I hadn't heard, but is a big piece of info regarding this) as well as the few lines from the movie do indicate that Bruce put the cowl away after that night. It's a very fitting idea for Nolan. This is what Nolan most probably intended, although I think he purposefully did not include too much proof of that in the film to allow that ambiguity for the fans.

Thanks for sharing that. Hopefully that puts it to rest. Its a crazy discussion anyways. Even if he continued to be Batman for 2 more months, but in that time, did nothing note worthy....who cares then? Just so that our imaginations or our expectations aren't let down? In Nolan's world, this Batman quits/moves on anyways, so whats the difference.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by Anita18

Doesn't Daggett say, "8 years, and he has to pick tonight?" That says to me that he really was gone for 8 years, or at the very least, hasn't done a big job like the stock exchange for that long.

Imo, that.

Originally Posted by The Joker

There's always one

Yep, I'm apparently that "one".

Absolutely. Unless you have some practical alternative suggestions about what a limping leg Batman would be doing out in Gotham after that night?

If your response is catching criminals, then that would be a confirmed sighting, since those captured criminals could substantiate Batman was still around.

Captured criminals exclaiming that they saw Batman is still not a confirmed sighting since the police didn't see him. The only reason why Blake said a confirmed sighting since that's the last time the police saw him.

How does he protect Gotham from the shadows?

"I Am The Night".

So Batman never protects in the shadows?

I wasn't going to bring that up, but since you have I'll gladly use that since Bruce was not bothered by being chased after either of these chases with the Police.

Wasn't bothered? Really? Bruce told Alfred that the police were not doing their job, and they weren't. Why be bothered by nuisances when you can avoid it?

You're putting words in Nolan's mouth by saying he made a generalization. How can it be a generalization when he says the 8 years is the retirement period? He hung up the cape and cowl.

It's spelled out simply. No generalization. No double meaning.

Lol, if you say so. I mean, that's all I can say really. You're not changing my mind and I'm not changing yours.

What kind of idiot tries to fight crime with a handicap like a limp?

You're just conjecturing again, and your what if scenario sounds so ludicrous. Batman going around the rooftops and taking on criminals with a limp.

Ridiculous scenario I cannot even possible envision of Nolan's Batman.

The injury, you said, got worse through those eight years. No way could Bruce have a limp from the beginning but yet it supposedly gets worse in the eight years? If he had the limp already, how did it get worse as you say? That doesn't make any sense. To say he had a limp from the beginning contradicts you saying the injury became worse when that's all it is eight years after, a limp.

No offense, but working in a hardware store, and running around rooftops and fighting criminals is a bit more physically stressful on a man than working in a hardware store.

It doesn't take years of ninja training to do that.

No offense taken since you're taking working at a hardware store so lightly it seems.

Someone already has. There's his quote.

Why you think he's generalizing is beyond me, except I suspect it's just an attempt to make your argument have some validity to it.

And his quote says nothing to make me think otherwise than what I am now.

And I'm not the only one that feels the same way that Nolan didn't make a clear-cut statement of Bruce having retired for a total of eight years.

What Batman memorabilia does he have in Wayne Manor?

What Batman memorabilia does he have in the cave besides just a suit? That's not a reason, as I said, for him to go in the Batcave to just stare.

Maybe, but it would help if one particular hard headed poster could back up his theories with something a bit more concrete like I have

I could say the same

Originally Posted by Ryan

Anno, you think everything I post is directed at you..lol. I hope you do ignore my posts..it's what ive wanted all along.lol

Cool story

Originally Posted by TheBat812

I'd have to say that given that special features explanation about Bruce's injury from Nolan (which I hadn't heard, but is a big piece of info regarding this) as well as the few lines from the movie do indicate that Bruce put the cowl away after that night. It's a very fitting idea for Nolan. This is what Nolan most probably intended, although I think he purposefully did not include too much proof of that in the film to allow that ambiguity for the fans.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by The Joker

baseless conjecturing.

Way too much of this goes on and for those that do there is no convincing. Lots of people used to argue that Dent was alive, although it never said in TDK that he died, the script stated that he had broken his neck. So what did people suppose? Oh, Dent died but Two Face lived. Of course he did. Until a shovel to the face like TDKR hits and proves that he did die.....or did he???