The Dark Knight Rises Anyone else not like the 8 year exile plot?

[Thundercrack85]

Well you do have to appreciate the fact that they couldn't make the movie they wanted to make.

Granted, this movie does have a few problems that really shouldn't be.

 

[kewlmatto]

Well you do have to appreciate the fact that they couldn't make the movie they wanted to make.

Granted, this movie does have a few problems that really shouldn't be.

It's almost a metaphor for Nolan's earlier views on the series after Heath's death. You can tell there was a time when he just didn't want to continue (he also stated this in a few interviews).

It's almost like Rachel's death is Heath's death in TDKR.

I can understand why they needed to change strategy, but yep, it's no real excuse for some of the more glaring problems. They still made a good film, just one that feels....clunky.

 

[MagnarTheGreat]

There's too much quitting in this movie. Alfred quits. Bruce quits...twice. Selina quits. Gordon wanted to quit. Blake quits.

 

[kewlmatto]

There's too much quitting in this movie. Alfred quits. Bruce quits...twice. Selina quits. Gordon wanted to quit. Blake quits.

 

[jak]

I got this response from a different website. It's a pretty good / well written explanation on the 8-year gap:

"Unfortunately the 8 year issue/Batman stopping has strong roots from the first two films. This series clearly established in Batman Begins that this particular version of Batman's goal is to end organized crime in Gotham and give justice a chance to prevail within the system. This theme is carried through in TDK when Bruce is trying to pass the mantle onto Harvey Dent and retire. Now, it's fine if you don't approve of a Batman who would retire, but it's a bit unfair to bash this film and then call The Dark Knight brilliant when its whole story is rooted in the idea that this version of Bruce Wayne is not only willing, but eager to hang up the cape and cowl and let public officials take over once the system has been cleaned up (the mob taken out).

Also, Miranda/Talia infers in the film that Bruce only became a recluse 3 years prior to the events of the film after finding out that the reactor can be turned into a nuke. So it's not like he was moping around over Rachel for 8 years. Likely, he was still keeping an eye on things in Gotham (Alfred says "You haven't been down here in a long time" which implies he's been active in the cave at some point after TDK, since there was no Batcave in TDK) for a while. Once the Dent Act is passed (when this happens in fuzzy, but a piece of legislation doesn't get passed overnight) that's when he decides to try and help Gotham as Bruce Wayne and takes the energy project. But when THAT hits a dead end, that's when the whole Howard Hughes routine begins. That's how I took it and there's a lot of evidence in the film to support it, I think. Also, I figure the 8 year gap in the story served a few purposes besides just aging the John Blake character. For one, it sets up an older Bruce Wayne who's not at the top of his game, which is part of the premise of the movie: Batman coming up against a superior physical threat...which is really him coming up against his own mortality. In addition, it gives some distance to the events of TDK which was needed considering The Joker couldn't be revisited and Batman's choice to take the fall for Harvey needed time to play out as a worthwhile sacrifice, otherwise you'd piss on the ending of that film. It's also an absolute nod to The Dark Knight Returns, and the Batman coming out of retirement angle. So to me, the Blake angle is just one of the many reasons they advanced the story 8 years. That's how I justify it in my head anyway, Kev could very well be right about why the Nolans specifically chose 8 years. But some passage of time seemed appropriate for the overall story they were telling."

 

[shauner111]

I got this response from a different website. It's a pretty good / well written explanation on the 8-year gap:

"Unfortunately the 8 year issue/Batman stopping has strong roots from the first two films. This series clearly established in Batman Begins that this particular version of Batman's goal is to end organized crime in Gotham and give justice a chance to prevail within the system. This theme is carried through in TDK when Bruce is trying to pass the mantle onto Harvey Dent and retire. Now, it's fine if you don't approve of a Batman who would retire, but it's a bit unfair to bash this film and then call The Dark Knight brilliant when its whole story is rooted in the idea that this version of Bruce Wayne is not only willing, but eager to hang up the cape and cowl and let public officials take over once the system has been cleaned up (the mob taken out).

Also, Miranda/Talia infers in the film that Bruce only became a recluse 3 years prior to the events of the film after finding out that the reactor can be turned into a nuke. So it's not like he was moping around over Rachel for 8 years. Likely, he was still keeping an eye on things in Gotham (Alfred says "You haven't been down here in a long time" which implies he's been active in the cave at some point after TDK, since there was no Batcave in TDK) for a while. Once the Dent Act is passed (when this happens in fuzzy, but a piece of legislation doesn't get passed overnight) that's when he decides to try and help Gotham as Bruce Wayne and takes the energy project. But when THAT hits a dead end, that's when the whole Howard Hughes routine begins. That's how I took it and there's a lot of evidence in the film to support it, I think. Also, I figure the 8 year gap in the story served a few purposes besides just aging the John Blake character. For one, it sets up an older Bruce Wayne who's not at the top of his game, which is part of the premise of the movie: Batman coming up against a superior physical threat...which is really him coming up against his own mortality. In addition, it gives some distance to the events of TDK which was needed considering The Joker couldn't be revisited and Batman's choice to take the fall for Harvey needed time to play out as a worthwhile sacrifice, otherwise you'd piss on the ending of that film. It's also an absolute nod to The Dark Knight Returns, and the Batman coming out of retirement angle. So to me, the Blake angle is just one of the many reasons they advanced the story 8 years. That's how I justify it in my head anyway, Kev could very well be right about why the Nolans specifically chose 8 years. But some passage of time seemed appropriate for the overall story they were telling."

Was it 3 or 5 years??

Either way, this is very true. Batman could have been around for a few years after TDK, but going out once in a while in a more low-key manner. Or like that post says, he tried to be Bruce Wayne for X amount of years, while being depressed and when that didnt go anywhere he went into full Howard Hughes mode.

 

[Anno_Domini]

There's too much quitting in this movie. Alfred quits. Bruce quits...twice. Selina quits. Gordon wanted to quit. Blake quits.

It's still up in the air if Selina quits. She could still be sneaking around in leather...or maybe that'll just be for Bruce's pleasure, haha.

 

[BH/HHH]

Maybe they should have called the film the Dark Knight Quits

 

[kewlmatto]

Oh im trying to cook some up right now

But in the meantime, im really enjoying kewlmatto's fanscript for the sequel to Batman Returns Guys read that ****!

Thanks Shauner!

Looking forward to seeing what you come up with.

I wonder why there aren't more Batman novels. Most of the ones that exist that aren't based on comics (Inferno, Dead White) are pretty ordinary unfortunately.

 

[jak]

Was it 3 or 5 years??

Either way, this is very true. Batman could have been around for a few years after TDK, but going out once in a while in a more low-key manner. Or like that post says, he tried to be Bruce Wayne for X amount of years, while being depressed and when that didnt go anywhere he went into full Howard Hughes mode.

I'm not sure. I'd have to see the movie again, I didn't catch it myself.

Chris Nolan also touches on the 8 year gap here in this interview:

4:44

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6cEmLwfEIo&feature=related

 

[BH/HHH]

I got this response from a different website. It's a pretty good / well written explanation on the 8-year gap:

"Unfortunately the 8 year issue/Batman stopping has strong roots from the first two films. This series clearly established in Batman Begins that this particular version of Batman's goal is to end organized crime in Gotham and give justice a chance to prevail within the system. This theme is carried through in TDK when Bruce is trying to pass the mantle onto Harvey Dent and retire. Now, it's fine if you don't approve of a Batman who would retire, but it's a bit unfair to bash this film and then call The Dark Knight brilliant when its whole story is rooted in the idea that this version of Bruce Wayne is not only willing, but eager to hang up the cape and cowl and let public officials take over once the system has been cleaned up (the mob taken out).

Also, Miranda/Talia infers in the film that Bruce only became a recluse 3 years prior to the events of the film after finding out that the reactor can be turned into a nuke. So it's not like he was moping around over Rachel for 8 years. Likely, he was still keeping an eye on things in Gotham (Alfred says "You haven't been down here in a long time" which implies he's been active in the cave at some point after TDK, since there was no Batcave in TDK) for a while. Once the Dent Act is passed (when this happens in fuzzy, but a piece of legislation doesn't get passed overnight) that's when he decides to try and help Gotham as Bruce Wayne and takes the energy project. But when THAT hits a dead end, that's when the whole Howard Hughes routine begins. That's how I took it and there's a lot of evidence in the film to support it, I think. Also, I figure the 8 year gap in the story served a few purposes besides just aging the John Blake character. For one, it sets up an older Bruce Wayne who's not at the top of his game, which is part of the premise of the movie: Batman coming up against a superior physical threat...which is really him coming up against his own mortality. In addition, it gives some distance to the events of TDK which was needed considering The Joker couldn't be revisited and Batman's choice to take the fall for Harvey needed time to play out as a worthwhile sacrifice, otherwise you'd piss on the ending of that film. It's also an absolute nod to The Dark Knight Returns, and the Batman coming out of retirement angle. So to me, the Blake angle is just one of the many reasons they advanced the story 8 years. That's how I justify it in my head anyway, Kev could very well be right about why the Nolans specifically chose 8 years. But some passage of time seemed appropriate for the overall story they were telling."

Great post never even thought of it like that.

 

[JackWhite]

I'm not sure. I'd have to see the movie again, I didn't catch it myself.

Chris Nolan also touches on the 8 year gap here in this interview:

4:44

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6cEmLwfEIo&feature=related

8 year gap FTW!

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

he stops being Batman because that's his way of fighting crime.

He wants to cover up Dent's crimes and for Dent to be the heroic symbol, not himself.

He can't be the one the criminals fear. He can't be out there saving people and catching criminals every night. He's supposed to be the criminal, to make Dent the hero. And it works. He was able to inspire the people to where they are able to help themselves. Going out into the streets would jeopardize this.

It isn't until Blake's speech, and his talk with Gordon, that he realizes that people still believe in/need the Batman.

While his life as Batman had to come to a halt, he put his energy into other ways to help people. When this fails, he loses confidence, as he feels he has no purpose for the next 3 years. He won't let himself get into a new relationship, he won't let himself fight crime everynight, and his plans to help the city failed with Dr.Pavel's discovery.

I thought this was an interesting side of Batman that we rarely get to see.

 

[BatLobster]

I got this response from a different website. It's a pretty good / well written explanation on the 8-year gap:

"Unfortunately the 8 year issue/Batman stopping has strong roots from the first two films. This series clearly established in Batman Begins that this particular version of Batman's goal is to end organized crime in Gotham and give justice a chance to prevail within the system. This theme is carried through in TDK when Bruce is trying to pass the mantle onto Harvey Dent and retire. Now, it's fine if you don't approve of a Batman who would retire, but it's a bit unfair to bash this film and then call The Dark Knight brilliant when its whole story is rooted in the idea that this version of Bruce Wayne is not only willing, but eager to hang up the cape and cowl and let public officials take over once the system has been cleaned up (the mob taken out).

Also, Miranda/Talia infers in the film that Bruce only became a recluse 3 years prior to the events of the film after finding out that the reactor can be turned into a nuke. So it's not like he was moping around over Rachel for 8 years. Likely, he was still keeping an eye on things in Gotham (Alfred says "You haven't been down here in a long time" which implies he's been active in the cave at some point after TDK, since there was no Batcave in TDK) for a while. Once the Dent Act is passed (when this happens in fuzzy, but a piece of legislation doesn't get passed overnight) that's when he decides to try and help Gotham as Bruce Wayne and takes the energy project. But when THAT hits a dead end, that's when the whole Howard Hughes routine begins. That's how I took it and there's a lot of evidence in the film to support it, I think. Also, I figure the 8 year gap in the story served a few purposes besides just aging the John Blake character. For one, it sets up an older Bruce Wayne who's not at the top of his game, which is part of the premise of the movie: Batman coming up against a superior physical threat...which is really him coming up against his own mortality. In addition, it gives some distance to the events of TDK which was needed considering The Joker couldn't be revisited and Batman's choice to take the fall for Harvey needed time to play out as a worthwhile sacrifice, otherwise you'd piss on the ending of that film. It's also an absolute nod to The Dark Knight Returns, and the Batman coming out of retirement angle. So to me, the Blake angle is just one of the many reasons they advanced the story 8 years. That's how I justify it in my head anyway, Kev could very well be right about why the Nolans specifically chose 8 years. But some passage of time seemed appropriate for the overall story they were telling."

Haha! I am the original author of that comment. I posted it on Kevin Smith's recent Fatman on Batman podcast . Full circle.

 

[HighFivingMF]

Heh. Saw the first sentence and instantly recognized it from the comments section of that podcast.

 

[jak]

he stops being Batman because that's his way of fighting crime.

He wants to cover up Dent's crimes and for Dent to be the heroic symbol, not himself.

He can't be the one the criminals fear. He can't be out there saving people and catching criminals every night. He's supposed to be the criminal, to make Dent the hero. And it works. He was able to inspire the people to where they are able to help themselves. Going out into the streets would jeopardize this.

It isn't until Blake's speech, and his talk with Gordon, that he realizes that people still believe in/need the Batman.

While his life as Batman had to come to a halt, he put his energy into other ways to help people. When this fails, he loses confidence, as he feels he has no purpose for the next 3 years. He won't let himself get into a new relationship, he won't let himself fight crime everynight, and his plans to help the city failed with Dr.Pavel's discovery.

I thought this was an interesting side of Batman that we rarely get to see.

This is a good point, I never thought of it like that, but it's pretty obvious when you think about it. If Batman goal was to inspire hope, how can he do that when he's become the scape goat for Harvey Dent's crimes? He sacrificed Batman for the 'greater good', which was a theme in TDK - true heroism / selflessness.

As you said Bruce went to a more philanthropic route to try to help the city which was the energy project. When that failed, he totally lost his purpose in life. With Rachel dead, he had no life outside of Batman / Gotham except for Alfred. It's easy to see why he'd become a depressed recluse.

It's also implied in the movie by Alfred that Bruce is almost subliminally waiting for things to go bad again, so the city will need Batman, and Bruce feels a sense of purpose -- and that he actually kind of has a death wish.

Bruce "You think I'll fail?"

Alfred " No, I'm afraid that you want to."


Bruce to Bane "Why don't you just kill me?"

 

[jak]

Haha! I am the original author of that comment. I posted it on Kevin Smith's recent Fatman on Batman podcast . Full circle.

,,

 

[AnneFan]

It's still up in the air if Selina quits. She could still be sneaking around in leather...or maybe that'll just be for Bruce's pleasure, haha.

This.

 

[Fudgie]

There's too much quitting in this movie. Alfred quits. Bruce quits...twice. Selina quits. Gordon wanted to quit. Blake quits.

It almost feels like Nolan quit, too. Quit putting the kind of good effort he put into the last two movies.

 

[BatLobster]

There's a lot of quitting, but there's more rising.

 

[MAKAVELI25]

I don't think I'll ever like the 8 year exile. I can understand why it was done, but even as someone who is a semi-casual fan of comic books, I just don't see Batman ever doing something like that. People keep on pointing out TDKR, but didn't Bruce only stop there because he was physically unable to?

 

[BatLobster]

Nope, he stopped in DKReturns because of anti-vigilantism policies in the government. Not all that dissimilar from the Harvey Dent Act, really. Being thought the murderer of Gotham's DA, that would probably make Batman a federal criminal (I think?).

 

[shauner111]

That's what i dont understand about people. The Dark Knight Returns had Bruce retire for a good decade, he got out of shape and drank a lot during his off time. But didn't he retire because of Jason Todd's death and for what else?? I havent read Returns in a while so i dont remember every detail that went into his retirement, but there must have been some government thing as well no? Anyways I think Bruce has a better reason for quitting in Nolans version. He could barely walk, he lost Rachel and Harvey, the crime was brought down significantly through the Dent Act. He didnt drink himself into oblivion on his off-time, nor did he sit around doing nothing as the city turned to **** (Returns). Instead it seems like he at least tried to help the city with his energy project and when that failed, he just became a recluse. All the while, Gotham was actually in a peaceful place, so he wasnt harming anybody but himself.

As much as i dig the concept of Returns, i actually think Bruces retirement in Rises was more justified.

In Returns he's not doing anything when people are getting mugged, etc. Even though he's aware..he would rather be a selfish old man. It seems like Bale was only self-destructing and not at the cost of others.

 

[Fudgie]

There's a lot of quitting, but there's more rising.

At the end of the movie. Big whoop.

 

[CapedCrusader14]

Yeah he quit because there was a government legislation put in outlawing vigilantes/superheroes *cough*Watchmen*cough*. But it's constantly hinted that he quit because of Jason Todd's death.

And I like your angle on the Rises retirement. It seems like Bruce attempted to do something to help the city even though he couldn't get out in the cape and cowl.