The Dark Knight Rises 8 Years Later... - Part 1

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]371787[/split]

 

[Poeman]

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Dark-Knight-Rises-Set-8-Years-Dark-Knight-27993.html

The Dark Knight Rises Is Set 8 Years After The Dark Knight
"It's really all about finishing Batman and Bruce Wayne's story. We left him in a very precarious place. Perhaps surprisingly for some people, our story picks up quite a bit later, eight years after The Dark Knight. So he's an older Bruce Wayne; he's not in a great state.

Really curious to see what the Bat faithful feel about this.

I think this is a genius move, personally this such a unique perspective then what were are usually accustomed to seeing with superhero films.

Nolan is an absolute mastermind when it comes to film-making and it probably took some serious guts to have this take place with that much of a time gap.

Are you excited with this time jump?
OR
do you feel 8 years will skip over so much in Gotham's lore?

 

[doobie]

OK Blake is not Narrows boy, he's the son of Falafel Vendor back for vengence on Flass. "Remember what he told you ..I'm the kid he was feedin'"

 

[CConn]

Also, why don't you like Richard? He's fun on a bun.

Because ever since he turned about 17 or so, he's been characterized as a tremendously huge *****.

I swear, nearly every issue he's in has to feature an inner monologue about how preoccupied he is with trying not to be in Batman's shadow. He laments endlessly about how badly he wants to be his own hero, but then is always woohoo concerned about "what Bruce would think", it's really rather sickening. And even in Batman and Robin and The Black Glove - where he was written phenomenally - there was still an element of his...need to be accepted by Bruce. It's just not a quality that I like in a person...let alone a hero.

Conversely, if you look at someone like Tim Drake...he's actually awesome. Rather than complain and compare himself to Bruce endlessly he just goes out, does his own thing, and kicks ass. He's his own man. He's rarely concerned about being in anyone's shadow. And that, IMO, makes him more like Bruce, and more fitting to be a proper Batman, than Dick will ever be.

 

[raybia]

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Dark-Knight-Rises-Set-8-Years-Dark-Knight-27993.html





Really curious to see what the Bat faithful feel about this.

I think this is a genius move, personally this such a unique perspective then what were are usually accustomed to seeing with superhero films.

Nolan is an absolute mastermind when it comes to film-making and it probably took some serious guts to have this take place with that much of a time gap.

Are you excited with this time jump?
OR
do you feel 8 years will skip over so much in Gotham's lore?

I was surprised by it but I'm okay with it. I think its Nolan's way of being able to close his story arc without the criticism of "ending Batman's career before it even really got started."

So the way he is doing it, there are all of the untold stories of the Dark Knight that could be told either in novel, comic book, or animated form. Or just left up to the imagination of the audience.

I also think that Nolan did it this way to close off his particular BatUniverse from future moviemakers. Any new Batman movies will certainly be a through a reboot rather than a return to Nolan's version.

 

[Saint]

But if you're "offended" if Nolan uses a different character in his stead, then you're not only a dick, you're a dumb dick.

I'm not greatly concerned with your evaluation of my feelings on the matter.

That said, a Dick Batman show wouldn't have been able to be all futuristic and stuff. Which was kinda cool.

Sure; Batman Beyond built itself on the shoulders of it's concept, certainly.

 

[Saint]

Because ever since he turned about 17 or so, he's been characterized as a tremendously huge *****.

I swear, nearly every issue he's in has to feature an inner monologue about how preoccupied he is with trying not to be in Batman's shadow. He laments endlessly about how badly he wants to be his own hero, but then is always woohoo concerned about "what Bruce would think", it's really rather sickening. And even in Batman and Robin and The Black Glove - where he was written phenomenally - there was still an element of his...need to be accepted by Bruce. It's just not a quality that I like in a person...let alone a hero.

Conversely, if you look at someone like Tim Drake...he's actually awesome. Rather than complain and compare himself to Bruce endlessly he just goes out, does his own thing, and kicks ass. He's his own man. He's rarely concerned about being in anyone's shadow. And that, IMO, makes him more like Bruce, and more fitting to be a proper Batman, than Dick will ever be.

I think this largely depends on who's writing the character, but I often find the reverse is true. Tim will say "I don't want to be like Batman," and then do everything in his power to be mini-Batman and do everything like Batman. Dick will say "I don't want to be like Batman," and then he might actually follow through with that.

Or, simply put, I thought Dick was being more of "his own man" while simultaneously impersonating Batman than Tim was using his own identity.

 

[CConn]

I think this largely depends on who's writing the character, but I often find the reverse is true. Tim will say "I don't want to be like Batman," and then do everything in his power to be mini-Batman and do everything like Batman. Dick will say "I don't want to be like Batman," and then he might actually follow through with that.

Or, simply put, I thought Dick was being more of "his own man" while simultaneously impersonating Batman than Tim was using his own identity.

Okay, I'm sorry. Marv Wolfman, Chuck Dixon, Devin Greyson, Peter Tomasi, Grant Morrison, Scott Synder and Kyle Higgins write Dick like a *****.

Obviously, Tim had a Desiree to not be like Batman (mainly when Dixon was writing him), but the past few years his writers have greatly distanced him from being overly concerned about Batman. And as of now, he's his own character totally independent from Batman.

Besides, my issue isn't with Dick not wanting to be Batman necessarily, it's how he goes about it. He is essentially characterized as being obsessed with Bruce Wayne and gaining his approval and acceptance. I've never once read that Tim needed Batman's acceptance. At least not in the past 5 years or so.

 

[CConn]

I'm not greatly concerned with your evaluation of my feelings on matter.

oh so I can openly say your feelings on the matter are as foolish and juvenile as the Star Wars fans who claim George Lucas "raped" their childhood)? Good. Glad I don't have to mince words.

 

[DKDetective]

oh so I can openly say your feelings on the matter are as foolish and juvenile as the Star Wars fans who claim George Lucas "raped" their childhood)? Good. Glad I don't have to mince words.

But George Lucas did rape my childhood. Since my blue box Star Wars VHS tapes broke, I'm forced to watch the altered dvds and the experience has become forever tainted.

More on topic, I personally don't want to see someone else take up the mantle because we haven't even gotten a Bat-family yet. I'd rather just see Bruce fill the hole of loneliness in his life first, like in Dark Victory. To me, that is the logical plotline right now for them to explore. After TDK and what appears to be 8 lonely years on the run, it's time for Bruce to find balance through philantrophy and the companionship of adopting a young ward who is a kindred spirit. Maybe that is where the orphanage comes into play. The last thing I want is some adult Robin or Batman successor.

 

[Sharkboy]

I don't think you really understood me; I'm not saying Nolan should be calling the John Blake character Dick Grayson. That wouldn't make any sense; I have no idea what role Blake plays, so transforming him into Dick Grayson would probably be stupid (especially since I don't believe for a second that Blake is going to be taking Bruce's place, as this is an entirely fan-generated theory, and those always turn out wrong).

What I'm saying is that if Nolan were writing a story about succession, about someone coming on board to carry on Batman's legacy, it would make infinitely more sense to use the character and scenario that already exist for that purpose (circus origin and all) than to invent Joe Nobody to act as a half-measure.

Furthermore, even if Dick were used in a manner that doesn't strictly conform to his traditional comic book history, I suspect that would probably still be preferable to Joe Nobody serving the same purpose--for the same reason it was more interesting to see Ra's Al Ghul adapted to a new role in Batman Begins (as Bruce's mentor) than it would have been to see some new character in that role.

No, I understood perfectly! I get it, any story about succession and legacy lines up perfectly with dick grayson and the essense of his character and it would be more logical to use him in that story than anything else, but like i said the character and his history contains a lot of weight.

Take Ra's for example, his character wouldn't just work without the name ducard, he's not an interchangable character, but this isn't just a choice by nolan it's because storywise his whole core is embedded into that character and the story, from the constructs of the LOS to his twisted version of his own crusade against crime. There's no lazurus, talia or "detective" but it;s still ra's all over that movie.

If dick grayson were in this film, his core would need to be present, we could argue what that is forever, but it would involve arguments such as him being bruce's ward, him being a kid, a circus performer, and most importantly him being a sidekick growing up in the shadow of bruce, eventually doing his own thing he's always been in the shadow of bruce, he's let this run his life, it's a major part of who he is, his essence. This is dick grayson, anything without these elements is just Dick by name. Hypothetically if Nolan could add these elements to the john blake character in TDK (a character who btw is a grown man and a cop) then yes, he should have been called dick grayson and been dick instead of average joe.

But if he dosent have these elements then there is nothing wrong with making him batman's successor, he's just not dick grayson, and it's fine. There's nothing written that someone can't make an interpretation where someone else can't take the mantle from him that isn't Dick Grayson...the nolanverse is an elseworld tale, the sooner you realise this the less insulted you'd be by the idea that john could concievably take the mantle.

Oh and for people who keep facepalming people talking about this fan generated rumour. pipe the f down, it's a fun bit of speculation, it's not like we have anything else to talk about here.

 

[Rocketman]

I would love animated movies, novels, and comics that take place between TDK and TDKR during those 8 years.

 

[CConn]

I would love animated movies, novels, and comics that take place between TDK and TDKR during those 8 years.

I'd be cool with some animated movies.

But comics? Why not just read the current comics that actually matter.

 

[Nevincer]

oh so I can openly say your feelings on the matter are as foolish and juvenile as the Star Wars fans who claim George Lucas "raped" their childhood)? Good. Glad I don't have to mince words.

Well, the way I see it George Lucas did rape my childhood... but, uh, I kinda enjoyed it

 

[Saint]

oh so I can openly say your feelings on the matter are as foolish and juvenile as the Star Wars fans who claim George Lucas "raped" their childhood)? Good. Glad I don't have to mince words.

I don't find that particularly insulting, being as Lucas has ruined Star Wars pretty thoroughly.

Okay, I'm sorry. Marv Wolfman, Chuck Dixon, Devin Greyson, Peter Tomasi, Grant Morrison, Scott Synder and Kyle Higgins write Dick like a *****.

Obviously, Tim had a Desiree to not be like Batman (mainly when Dixon was writing him), but the past few years his writers have greatly distanced him from being overly concerned about Batman. And as of now, he's his own character totally independent from Batman.

Besides, my issue isn't with Dick not wanting to be Batman necessarily, it's how he goes about it. He is essentially characterized as being obsessed with Bruce Wayne and gaining his approval and acceptance. I've never once read that Tim needed Batman's acceptance. At least not in the past 5 years or so.

I think you're seeing what you want to see, as I've not read anything about Dick needing Bruce's "acceptance" in recent memory; only that he, as Batman, wanted to perform to Bruce's standard. Different thing.

That said, the "My sidekick is better than yours" battle is not one I am particularly motivated to fight, so carry on.

 

[Saint]

But George Lucas did rape my childhood. Since my blue box Star Wars VHS tapes broke, I'm forced to watch the altered dvds and the experience has become forever tainted.

I was okay with the DVDs. I draw the line at Dath Vader howling "Nooooo!!!" at the end of ROTJ on the Blu Rays, though. I'll wait for the release of the unaltered versions for that.

 

[bunk]

I was okay with the DVDs. I draw the line at Dath Vader howling "Nooooo!!!" at the end of ROTJ on the Blu Rays, though. I'll wait for the release of the unaltered versions for that.

I finally sat down and watched the ROTJ Blu Ray this weekend. Mind you, this is my favorite movie of all time, in which that moment is probably my favorite… and Lucas completely ruined it.

 

[Dr. Hurt]

Because ever since he turned about 17 or so, he's been characterized as a tremendously huge *****.

I swear, nearly every issue he's in has to feature an inner monologue about how preoccupied he is with trying not to be in Batman's shadow. He laments endlessly about how badly he wants to be his own hero, but then is always woohoo concerned about "what Bruce would think", it's really rather sickening. And even in Batman and Robin and The Black Glove - where he was written phenomenally - there was still an element of his...need to be accepted by Bruce. It's just not a quality that I like in a person...let alone a hero.

Conversely, if you look at someone like Tim Drake...he's actually awesome. Rather than complain and compare himself to Bruce endlessly he just goes out, does his own thing, and kicks ass. He's his own man. He's rarely concerned about being in anyone's shadow. And that, IMO, makes him more like Bruce, and more fitting to be a proper Batman, than Dick will ever be.

You forget that he called himself Tim Wayne and almost went insane when Bruce "died"? And lets not forget that he bought the Theatre where Bruce saw Zorro and made it his HQ. Dude is ****ed up.

And that, IMO, makes him more like Bruce, and more fitting to be a proper Batman, than Dick will ever be.

I think you missed the point of Morrison's saga: Everyone can be batman if he lives up to his ideals. That's all it takes. Its not the costume or the MO, its the spirit. Dick, the Club of Heroes and everyone in Batman Inc are proof of that. Dr Hurt and Darkseid only focused on the trauma and obsession and their Batmen failed. Jason Todd failed as well.

 

[Dr. Hurt]

I was okay with the DVDs. I draw the line at Dath Vader howling "Nooooo!!!" at the end of ROTJ on the Blu Rays, though. I'll wait for the release of the unaltered versions for that.

How big of a batfan are you when you read that as "Return of the Joker"?

 

[Rocketman]

To me, George Lucas got possessed by a "Bad Idea Demon" somewhere in 1997, when the "Star Wars Trilogy: Special Edition" was being released in theaters and on VHS, and they all got ****ed up with ******ed CGI and singing alien lounge singers. From there, Episode I was released in '99, and then we no longer had any reason to cry about the things that happened in 1997. Literally, almost every single idea Lucas has had since 1997 has been a TERRIBLE one. There is fan fiction on the Internet that is soooo much better than what he has crapped out on legal pads.

And beyond that, George Lucas directed Star Wars. He did NOT direct The Empires Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi. Empire and Jedi are the two best (for me) out of the entire saga, so that tells you exactly what I think of Lucas (hint: not much).

 

[The Batman]

I used to love Tim back in the chuck dixon/young justice days, but fanboys and dc brass alike have started overrating the character in my eyes.

And Dick was really the only robin whod be interesting in the mantle of Batman. All the other Robins are, in some ways, a mirror of Bruce. MAking them Batman would just seem like a watered down version of the real thing.

 

[CConn]

You forget that he called himself Tim Wayne and almost went insane when Bruce "died"? And lets not forget that he bought the Theatre where Bruce saw Zorro and made it his HQ. Dude is ****ed up.

Oh, I'm not saying he isn't ****ed up. Just that he's ****sd up in a more awesome way.

I think you missed the point of Morrison's saga: Everyone can be batman if he lives up to his ideals. That's all it takes. Its not the costume or the MO, its the spirit. Dick, the Club of Heroes and everyone in Batman Inc are proof of that. Dr Hurt and Darkseid only focused on the trauma and obsession and their Batmen failed. Jason Todd failed as well.

No, I didn't miss the point of Morrison's saga, but you did miss the point of my post.

I'm not saying Tim would be a better Batman in terms of the grand philosophical picture of Batman and his mythos, I meant I personally would enjoy Tim as Batman due to his personality.

 

[Sharkboy]

To me, George Lucas got possessed by a "Bad Idea Demon" somewhere in 1997, when the "Star Wars Trilogy: Special Edition" was being released in theaters and on VHS, and they all got ****ed up with ******ed CGI and singing alien lounge singers. From there, Episode I was released in '99, and then we no longer had any reason to cry about the things that happened in 1997. Literally, almost every single idea Lucas has had since 1997 has been a TERRIBLE one. There is fan fiction on the Internet that is soooo much better than what he has crapped out on legal pads.

And beyond that, George Lucas directed Star Wars. He did NOT direct The Empires Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi. Empire and Jedi are the two best (for me) out of the entire saga, so that tells you exactly what I think of Lucas (hint: not much).

He's a visual effects wizard that was unjustly placed amongst the same circle as his friends, Spielberg and Coppola. If anything he's still riding on the fumes from all the stroke he recieved for the first film in 1977 and still thinks he's an adept director who's taken a misstep or two, despite the fact that the only worthy thing he's done for the series is work on the first movie's exhaustingly revolutionary visual effects (the trait he's managed to render obsolete with his over over over reliance on cgi). His story is basic and the structure rips off Kurosawa, the acting is mediocre at best, only saved by the fantastic leads.

Heck in my opinion the only amazing film in the series is Empire, and that is the only film that i think lives up to the insanely huge and dedicated fanbase the series has. (and parts of the 6th one)

 

[Nevincer]

He's a visual effects wizard that was unjustly placed amongst the same circle as his friends, Spielberg and Coppola. If anything he's still riding on the fumes from all the stroke he recieved for the first film in 1977 and still thinks he's an adept director who's taken a misstep or two, despite the fact that the only worthy thing he's done for the series is work on the first movie's exhaustingly revolutionary visual effects (the trait he's managed to render obsolete with his over over over reliance on cgi). His story is basic and the structure rips off Kurosawa, the acting is mediocre at best, only saved by the fantastic leads.

Heck in my opinion the only amazing film in the series is Empire, and that is the only film that i think lives up to the insanely huge and dedicated fanbase the series has. (and parts of the 6th one)

To me, George Lucas got possessed by a "Bad Idea Demon" somewhere in 1997, when the "Star Wars Trilogy: Special Edition" was being released in theaters and on VHS, and they all got ****ed up with ******ed CGI and singing alien lounge singers. From there, Episode I was released in '99, and then we no longer had any reason to cry about the things that happened in 1997. Literally, almost every single idea Lucas has had since 1997 has been a TERRIBLE one. There is fan fiction on the Internet that is soooo much better than what he has crapped out on legal pads.

And beyond that, George Lucas directed Star Wars. He did NOT direct The Empires Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi. Empire and Jedi are the two best (for me) out of the entire saga, so that tells you exactly what I think of Lucas (hint: not much).

On a more serious note, these posts are so true

 

[Broker]

I think its Nolan's way of being able to close his story arc without the criticism of "ending Batman's career before it even really got started."

Surely that would depend entirely on how the arc was ended?

I also think that Nolan did it this way to close off his particular BatUniverse from future moviemakers. Any new Batman movies will certainly be a through a reboot rather than a return to Nolan's version.

I don't really see how that's the case. TDKR being set 8 years later doesn't prevent someone from doing a film in Nolan's Universe. If they so desired, someone could do a film that was set in those 8 years.

But I think it is a given that whatever comes next will be a re-boot, so it is inconsequential.