The Official Rate/Review Thread for TDKR (TAG SPOILERS!!!) - Part 3

[regwec]

Yes, no.3 is the incidence which Guard thinks abandons the issue. I agree with him: a cornerstone of the whole premise of Batman's mythos is squandered in order to give Ann Hathaway a fairly weak one-liner.

It's a cheap move. Objectively, it's no better than some of the Joel Schumacher "zingers". The third act of TDKR gives the impression that Nolan wanted to get that part of the denouement over with, so he could get on to act 4: the Mega Ending.

[BatLobsterRises]

I think Batman's no-gun stance deserved a little poking fun of, since he's a guy who denounces handguns but uses vehicles that wield far greater firepower. He does everything he can to not take life but as Alfred so aptly put in TDK, "Didn't you expect that there'd be some casualties?"

I like to think of Selina as Bruce's better half. She'll do what's necessary if he won't. I thought her killing Bane with Batman's own weaponry really accentuated that.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

I think Batman's no-gun stance deserved a little poking fun of, since he's a guy who denounces handguns but uses vehicles that wield far greater firepower. He does everything he can to not take life but as Alfred so aptly put in TDK, "Didn't you expect that there'd be some casualties?"

I like to think of Selina as Bruce's better half. She'll do what's necessary if he won't.

True, but I would have at least liked Batman to make a slight at her for ending Bane before they take off to stop Talia.

[BatLobsterRises]

The way I see it, they were at war (Batman's own words), she saved his life and they had a nuke to stop. It would have petulant for Batman to scold her at a time like that, and he knows by now that she's not one to be talked down to.

However, I would have enjoyed Batman simply not saying anything and Catwoman sarcastically going "You're welcome", as a little callback to earlier in the film. Maybe a bit too obvious though.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

The way I see it, they were at war (Batman's own words), she saved his life and they had a nuke to stop. It would have petulant for Batman to scold her at a time like that, and he knows by now that she's not one to be talked down to.

However, I would have enjoyed Batman simply not saying anything and Catwoman sarcastically going "You're welcome", as a little callback to earlier in the film. Maybe a bit too obvious though.

Well, it didn't have to be a full on Batman morality lecture, a playful, half serious comment could have worked nicely.

[BatLobsterRises]

True, true.

[Baneis8feettall]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

I think Batman's no-gun stance deserved a little poking fun of, since he's a guy who denounces handguns but uses vehicles that wield far greater firepower. He does everything he can to not take life but as Alfred so aptly put in TDK, "Didn't you expect that there'd be some casualties?"

I like to think of Selina as Bruce's better half. She'll do what's necessary if he won't. I thought her killing Bane with Batman's own weaponry really accentuated that.

Better half.. Nope. Bruce Wayne is larger than life man and that's why he is the real hero. Selina doesn't have the heart he has. She is more like Harvey Dent. Good by nature but as corruptible as ordinary human.

His no killing policy makes Batman greater character than typical Bronson,Eastwood,Punisher,Rorschach etc. characters in movies. He knows killing criminals wouldn't solve the real problem and it makes him just a part of the problem.

We have dozens of so called "heroes" killing without regarding any laws or human life. This alone makes Batman probably greatest heroic character. Despite all his weapons,power,anger,tragic past he chooses not to kill even the worst criminals and still believes in justice & humanity. It's really rare to see find such hero in movies.

[The Guard]

Yes, no.3 is the incidence which Guard thinks abandons the issue. I agree with him: a cornerstone of the whole premise of Batman's mythos is squandered in order to give Ann Hathaway a fairly weak one-liner.

It's a cheap move. Objectively, it's no better than some of the Joel Schumacher "zingers". The third act of TDKR gives the impression that Nolan wanted to get that part of the denouement over with, so he could get on to act 4: the Mega Ending.

Exactly.

Abandoned is a very strong word considering:

1: Batman knocks gun out of Selina's hand "No Guns"
2: Blake throws gun away "Got two dead bodies and more questions"
3: Catwoman blows away Bane "I dont feel as strongly about the hwole no guns thing"

None of which features ANY moral/thematic exploration.

None. They are just lines of dialogue with no commentary/conversation about the topic.

Whereas in BATMAN BEGINS, we got an entire scene devoted to Bruce deciding he won’t be an executioner and a callback to that with Ra’s Al Ghul…that’s exploration.

In THE DARK KNIGHT, there are two whole sequences more or less devoted to the idea/fallibility of Batman not killing and an eventual decision that he must be a more violent, darker knight and at least appear to be a murderer…that’s exploration.

In TDKR, we get one line about guns, with no real moral exploration whatsoever, Blake “throwing his gun away”, which could easily just be his first response to killing, disgust, which MANY have felt, but which isn’t a moral commentary on killing in the least, and Catwoman blowing away Bane with a quip about how she likes gns, because it was an efficient way to move the story forward and someone thought that was a clever line.

One of these "takes" on the concept of no guns/not killing doesn't fit with the other two.

I think Batman's no-gun stance deserved a little poking fun of, since he's a guy who denounces handguns but uses vehicles that wield far greater firepower. He does everything he can to not take life but as Alfred so aptly put in TDK, "Didn't you expect that there'd be some casualties?"

I like to think of Selina as Bruce's better half. She'll do what's necessary if he won't. I thought her killing Bane with Batman's own weaponry really accentuated that.

Catwoman's not his better half...she's the half that reminds that he's human, and that he can enjoy life, and also a cautionary tale that keeps him from crossing certain lines.

As a huge fan of Batman’s “no guns” stance as something that sets him apart from other modern action heroes…the majority of the useage of firepower in these films only served to reinforce to me that Chris Nolan just doesn’t get the concept that well. He sort of nodded at it, but he never effectively explored it, and certainly not with the depth that certain moments in the comics have.

Well, it didn't have to be a full on Batman morality lecture, a playful, half serious comment could have worked nicely

Or…Catwoman could have arrived, on her own, as part of her transformation into a beneficial character/force for good, that she was going to “start over” and avoid the mistakes of her past, which included killing. Show Batman that she had changed somewhat beyond just coming back to save him.

[BatLobsterRises]

Originally Posted by The Guard

Catwoman's not his better half...she's the half that reminds that he's human, and that he can enjoy life, and also a cautionary tale that keeps him from crossing certain lines.

Well, with "better half" I was being a bit tongue in cheek as that's just a phrase one can use for a significant other. What you're saying is undoubtedly true, I just think that Catwoman's looser morals and less of a dogmatic approach when it comes to killing serves as an extension of that. That's not to say Batman is wrong in his conviction and should be more like her, not at all...but I think it's always interesting character development for Batman having to learn to work with someone with an opposing view and accept it even if it's diametrically opposed to his own position.

Originally Posted by The Guard

As a huge fan of Batman’s “no guns” stance as something that sets him apart from other modern action heroes…the majority of the useage of firepower in these films only served to reinforce to me that Chris Nolan just doesn’t get the concept that well. He sort of nodded at it, but he never effectively explored it, and certainly not with the depth that certain moments in the comics have.

I think you're right to an extent here, but I do think it's a dilemma that's easy to fall into for any filmmaker looking to make a large-scale movie. By nature, these are action films and there are certain audience expectations that come along with that. Things going boom comes with the territory a bit. Plus with the more adult tone and realism they were trying to establish, the Bat-vehicles being military-based made some sense. I also think Burton's film might have set a certain precedent in the mainstream for the Batmobile having machine guns that Nolan took a cue from, having been a fan of that film. However, I will concede that I think Nolan was a bit caught between his desire to make a more "action movie" version of Batman and a feeling of obligation to honor the source material, and the message got a bit confused at times.

Now, if they ever let a true detective Batman film get made, that might be a completely different story...

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

Well, with "better half" I was being a bit tongue in cheek as that's just a phrase one can use for a significant other. What you're saying is undoubtedly true, I just think that Catwoman's looser morals and less of a dogmatic approach when it comes to killing serves as an extension of that. That's not to say Batman is wrong in his conviction and should be more like her, not at all...but I think it's always interesting character development for Batman having to learn to work with someone with an opposing view and accept it even if it's diametrically opposed to his own position.



I think you're right to an extent here, but I do think it's a dilemma that's easy to fall into for any filmmaker looking to make a large-scale movie. By nature, these are action films and there are certain audience expectations that come along with that. Things going boom comes with the territory a bit. Plus with the more adult tone and realism they were trying to establish, the Bat-vehicles being military-based made some sense. I also think Burton's film might have set a certain precedent in the mainstream for the Batmobile having machine guns that Nolan took a cue from, having been a fan of that film. However, I will concede that I think Nolan was a bit caught between his desire to make a more "action movie" version of Batman and a feeling of obligation to honor the source material, and the message got a bit confused at times.

Now, if they ever let a true detective Batman film get made, that might be a completely different story...

That Batman film did get made. It's called The Dark Knight.

[BatLobsterRises]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

That Batman film did get made. It's called The Dark Knight.

Just to set the record straight, I love TDK. It definitely had detective elements, but it was more thriller/crime saga than full-stop detective/mystery. I meant if WB ever let a lower budget Batman movie get made where things didn't need to blow up as much and it was more about Batman having to unravel a mystery that spanned the entire film (my ideal scenario for the next Riddler movie).

And yeah, the chances are very slim of that actually happening any time soon.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

Just to set the record straight, I love TDK. It definitely had detective elements, but it was more thriller/crime saga than full-stop detective/mystery. I meant if WB ever let a lower budget Batman movie get made where things didn't need to blow up as much and it was more about Batman having to unravel a mystery that spanned the entire film (my ideal scenario for the next Riddler movie).

And yeah, the chances are very slim of that actually happening any time soon.

Haha, I know man. Was just messin'.

[BatLobsterRises]

Originally Posted by JackWhite

Haha, I know man. Was just messin'.

Ah, gotcha lol.

True story, I read your post on my phone while waiting in line at Target and had an internal debate as to whether TDK could/should be considered a detective film on my drive home.

#missingsarcasm

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

Ah, gotcha lol.

True story, I read your post on my phone while waiting in line at Target and had an internal debate as to whether TDK could/should be considered a detective film on my drive home.

#missingsarcasm

lol. Interesting.

I just finished watching TDK today, and man, I really did love the detective; almost cat and mouse battle with Batman and the Joker. It was a real nice kick seeing Batman appear from the dark corner of the crime scene, showing he was indeed there first, before Gordon and Ramirez.

Not to mention all the other detective aspects, like Batman giving Gordon lightly radiated bills to operate with, knowing he has no jurisdiction as Batman and going to Hong Kong to extradite Lau and even Bruce following the lead to 1502 Randolph apartment. It was nice seeing Bruce do a rundown on Selina on the Bat-computer at the start of TDKR.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by The Guard

I’m not sure why people are trying to use “Well, that’s what he did to his victims” as an excuse for a poor resolution to the two characters’ interactions or sloppy writing in general. I guess because that’s all they have to work with.

However…

What we’re told in the film is that Bane is a torturer.

What we’re shown in the film is that Bane is a torturer.

What he does to Batman is a prolongued form of torture.

Bane may have killed a few people quickly and brutally and unceremoniously in the movie when the situation called for it, but that’s clearly not his preferred method (witness what he does to Dagget, the kangaroo court and the "exhile", and of course, what he does with Batman). Bane is someone who was shown to kill with his hands. And so naturally he gets taken out by…a gun? But there’s no real poetic justice there, just action movie cliché. Any attempt to find some kind of “depth” therein is going to come up empty, because there’s nothing really that was explored about the idea of killing with guns,and there's nothing there to pore over, because all thats there is the inherent action movie cliche.

Wasn't Batman going to torture Bane for a little when he broke the mask inside City Hall? Isn't that pretty much poetic justice? That whole 'then I'll give you permission to die' nod before Talia stabbed him.

And then Bane being shot when he was going to shoot Batman. How is that not poetic either?

There’s just really nothing interesting about Bane's death/final demise, and because here's a shift in the momentum of the film, and because the writers never come back to Batman/Bane until they need "drama", the resolution between Bane and Batman is lousy, and amounts to Batman saying Bane's lines back to him after defeating Bane. Any thematic momentum there is dissolves when Bane gets the upper hand again, and so there's ultimately no satisfying payoff to Bane/Batman's final encounter.

I disagree that it's lousy, but to each their own. Bane has his final words, albeit mostly from Talia, but we got some powerful emotional connection before the death even if the death itself went by fast.

You want something thematically relevant/powerful? Have this torturer, this man who imprisoned Batman after seeking to break down society, ultimately become imprisoned by Batman and that society that he tried to destroy for the rest of his life. A far better ending would have been to have Bane have to survive, to live with his failure, or at least, to be unable to do so.

Imo, every villain should've been sent to prison to live with their failures, but alas, these are films where mostly every villain die.

[BatLobsterRises]

I pretty much expected Bane to die. Just seemed like the guy was way too dangerous to make it out of the movie alive.

[JackWhite]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

I pretty much expected Bane to die. Just seemed like the guy was way too dangerous to make it out of the movie alive.

Same. Bane had to be taken care of.

[Fudgie]

Never expected him to get such a lame death.

[Anno_Domini]

One could say the same for Harvey Dent as well. The series has never gotten a villain's death perfectly right.

[The Joker]

What was so bad about Harvey's death? It was the most emotional and impactful villain death of the trilogy.

[Anno_Domini]

I'm not saying it wasn't impactful, but the way he died felt anti-climatic. What made it more impactful itself was the speech after the death, imo.

[craigdbfan]

It wasn't really anti climactic though. There was a ton of setup before he died with Gordon and Batman confronting him about what he was doing.

I don't mind Bane's unceremonious death but Two Face's death scene was really damn great.

Some don't even notice how there's a shot of the coin actually landing on the non charred side too after Batman tackles him. That's such a brilliant touch.

[The Joker]

First time I've heard Harvey's death be accused of being that. The only complaint you usually hear is that people wanted more Two Face, and that's just a testament to how good he was.

[Excelsior.]

Harvey's Death was "perfectly right"; so was Ra's Al Ghul's. Bane's death was perfectly terrible.

[Anno_Domini]

So be it if it's the first time you heard someone say it; I've always thought the death itself felt anti-climatic. I enjoyed everything about Two-Face but the tackle that results in his death was 'meh'.