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

[Homer J. Fong]

I increasingly dislike the eight-year exile aspect. Dramatically, it works, but I have serious trouble dealing with the Batman that's been established going away promptly after the end of The Dark Knight. Why continue rebuilding the cave in that case? Cut out the "last confirmed sighting" line, and I'd have a far easier time dealing with it, because it'd leave so much more room to imagine that Batman went on for some amount of time after TDK but before TDKR. As it is, the "confirmed" means that you can force in some imaginary adventures in the time in between, and I'll choose to do that, because I have such a hard time accepting a Batman who was only Batman for less than a year and only encountered one extraordinary threat beyond the level of a Falcone or Maroni. But trying to hold onto that "confirmed" is reaching. Oh well. I also would have preferred the opposite approach, with Bruce Wayne being gone for the eight years, lost in the monster that is Batman. I also question the injuries he has at the beginning of the film having been sustained for eight years, but the back-breaking being a comparatively swift recovery. But those matter less than that this Batman existed so briefly and was so quick to retreat.

 

[darknight7]

I increasingly dislike the eight-year exile aspect. Dramatically, it works, but I have serious trouble dealing with the Batman that's been established going away promptly after the end of The Dark Knight. Why continue rebuilding the cave in that case? Cut out the "last confirmed sighting" line, and I'd have a far easier time dealing with it, because it'd leave so much more room to imagine that Batman went on for some amount of time after TDK but before TDKR. As it is, the "confirmed" means that you can force in some imaginary adventures in the time in between, and I'll choose to do that, because I have such a hard time accepting a Batman who was only Batman for less than a year and only encountered one extraordinary threat beyond the level of a Falcone or Maroni. But trying to hold onto that "confirmed" is reaching. Oh well. I also would have preferred the opposite approach, with Bruce Wayne being gone for the eight years, lost in the monster that is Batman. I also question the injuries he has at the beginning of the film having been sustained for eight years, but the back-breaking being a comparatively swift recovery. But those matter less than that this Batman existed so briefly and was so quick to retreat.

Agreed.

--dk7

 

[The Guard]

I think it would've made more sense for him to be breaking down because he didn't take an eight year hiatus.

Agreed. It would even have made sense if they implied that he TRIED to keep being Batman after the events of THE DARK KNIGHT, as a way to keep himself distracted from Rachel's loss and his failure with Harvey, but the combination of his broken body giving out on him and being hunted by the cops made it impossible to continue so he retired, though against his will, so that when he became a hermit, it was because of his failure to fight for Gotham, failure to keep being Batman, and his failures with Dent and Rachel, and ultimately, Gordon, who he was unable to say goodbye and reveal his identity to, and who felt abandoned for that eight year stretch. Had that been the case, I would have shown a scene of him being hunted and almost getting caught because of this and realizing he has to hang up the cowl (and maybe even seeing him do it) instead of Gordon's speech at Dent's funerla being repeated prior to the opening sequences.

 

[Zatanna]

This is exactly how I feel. For such a dramatic plot point it was done with so swiftly that I didn't care for it at all, and it was something I was so excited for due to it's gravitas. Words can't express how disappointing that was.

I was prepared to see more of Bruce struggling to break out of his reclusive state... expecting it actually. Disappointing indeed and it just left me feeling, IDK, empty I guess.

 

[KalMart]

What was kid of nice about Alfred confessing to burning that letter from Rachel and never telling him was that it reflected upon the decision of him and Gordon to bury the truth about Dent...that somewhere in there after hanging on to what may have initially been a 'healthy lie'...it's time to accept the truth and let go in some way or another. Different circumstances, but it still speaks to the time that should have been good for him to heal and move on...but instead it made him more fatalistic in Alfred's eyes.

 

[MrReese]

I'm glad I found this thread, because something has been bugging me about the movie, and the more I think, the more I realize it's the 8 year exile/retirement aspects. There's a lot to love in the movie, there really is, but that stuff just didn't sit right.

The thing is, Nolan's Batman is different from the comics Batman. The comics Batman is all about "I'm launching a war on crime, and that war will never stop, so I'll never stop." Nolan's Batman is all about "I need to create a symbol of good for Gotham." And Nolan tells that story well. Bruce creates the symbol in BB. In TDK, he sees the negative side of the symbol (the Bat-guys with guns), but he also sees the positive side (Harvey Dent being inspired by Batman). Then, because of the Joker, Batman must become a criminal, and the symbol is ruined and tainted, so he goes into exile. By the end of TDKR, the symbol has meaning again (they built a statue to Batman, after all) and so Batman can retire. Nolan told that Batman story, but it's not quite the story I think some of us would've liked.

Also, I didn't like the statue. Throwing it out there, I did not care for it. Fights with Bane? Awesome. Statue? No thanks.

 

[Saint]

Out of a "hospital"? you say?

Bruce was in an underground jail/pit in the middle of no where with nothing but a man who punched him in the back once...

Spoiler

dumb

--dk7

Shrug. I don't know anything about the particular injury or what would be required to mend it one way or the other--and the same is true, I suspect, of most of the people discussing it.

Either way, the movie has a hovercraft and a guy in a bat costume. I'm not too broken up if the medical science isn't true to life.

Eh...the film hints at Alfred feeling that way. Bruce never once admits it. He becomes Batman because Gotham needs him again, and then retires Batman as soon as he can by faking his death.

Yes, he comes out of retirement because Gotham needs him--but that doesn't preclude him from wanting to do it. When Alfred implies he's no longer able to be Batman, Bruce's reaction says to me he's taking that like a challenge. He says something like "You said I couldn't do it" afterwards. I also think it's evident in Bale's performance, at least at first, that he's enjoying himself.

As much as Batman can enjoy being Batman, of course.

 

[BaleISBatman4ev]

Too many of you overbloat the 8 year retirement thing! I think a lot of you are underestimating how much Bruce wanted to CONTINUE being the Batman. The events of TDK led him to HAVE to give up the cape and cowl. The lie he and gordon perpetuatd to keep the peace forced his hand.

At the beginning of TDKR we get a warn down Bruce who doesn't know how to live without conflict or without being the Batman... and he JUMPS at the first sign of trouble to be Batman again. Thats why he had the cave built and thats why Alfred tells him he feels like "your just waiting for things to go bad again". He didn't willingly retire!

 

[raybia]

I too am disappointed that both Batman and Bruce Wayne disappeared for those eight years.

It would have been fantastic if Bruce Wayne had become a recluse, falling deeper into his Batman persona because of the events of TDK. He would still be operating as a crime-fighter but as a wanted vigilante; by the time we see him in TDKR he would be experienced, fully-established and as close to the Batman of the comics as possible within the restraints of Nolan's world.

I believe it would have made the first encounter with Bane even more thrilling since Bane would have been fighting Batman in his prime rather than a Batman who had just come out of retirement.

I would have rather have it this way too! How would this had effected other aspects of the movie if they went this route?

 

[raybia]

Too many of you overbloat the 8 year retirement thing! I think a lot of you are underestimating how much Bruce wanted to CONTINUE being the Batman. The events of TDK led him to HAVE to give up the cape and cowl. The lie he and gordon perpetuatd to keep the peace forced his hand.

At the beginning of TDKR we get a warn down Bruce who doesn't know how to live without conflict or without being the Batman... and he JUMPS at the first sign of trouble to be Batman again. Thats why he had the cave built and thats why Alfred tells him he feels like "your just waiting for things to go bad again". He didn't willingly retire!

I missed this. You are correct! Of course it would seem though that Bruce would not have let himself go physically and would have had his knees worked on.

 

[darknight7]

Shrug. I don't know anything about the particular injury or what would be required to mend it one way or the other--and the same is true, I suspect, of most of the people discussing it.

Either way, the movie has a hovercraft and a guy in a bat costume. I'm not too broken up if the medical science isn't true to life.


Yes, he comes out of retirement because Gotham needs him--but that doesn't preclude him from wanting to do it. When Alfred implies he's no longer able to be Batman, Bruce's reaction says to me he's taking that like a challenge. He says something like "You said I couldn't do it" afterwards. I also think it's evident in Bale's performance, at least at first, that he's enjoying himself.

As much as Batman can enjoy being Batman, of course.

I'm not coming down on you personally Saint, but I hate the "it's a movie" excuse. I think that's just an easy way of bypassing the issues with the movie. If they are going to be writing an A-class movie and taking the time to explain why we should believe in this real world hero, and that his gadgets could all exist in our universe - then why cheap out on other parts of the story? Would you not call that lazy writing? - I would.

Not to mention his body is completely mangled (according to the Doctor) messed up cartilage, bunk knee, etc. These kind of injuries don't disappear over night (especially when they haven't been cared for in 8 years)

So now his back is being punched back into place by some guy in a pit and sit ups and push ups magically heal his back and the rest of his body? I don't buy that, and I don't accept "it's a movie" for an answer, although I will accept "it was a bad choice in the writing department" as an answer.

I for one know of back injuries (specifically bulged discs) and I can tell you those are injuries that do not heal. Surgery is the only answer. Or months and months (sometimes years) of physiotherapy and acupuncture/strengthening.

Maybe I am taking the injuries too far, but my point is: Nolan wanted us to believe in this story, this character by taking some fantastical things and grounding them in a possible reality. Well he did a great job of it for some things, why not for all things?

In regards to realistic injury: I guess you could say the same for Harvey in TDK (considering he looked like a zombie) but there is a difference between pain and being physically broken

--dk7

 

[Prison Mike]

I don't mind the 8 year exile plot point but the one thing that bums me out is that the line the Joker said in TDK "I have a feeling we'll be doing this for a long time" or something like that never came true.

 

[raybia]

I don't mind the 8 year exile plot point but the one thing that bums me out is that the line the Joker said in TDK "I have a feeling we'll be doing this for a long time" or something like that never came true.

No doubt the Joker would have appeared in this movie if Ledger had not died.

 

[Homer J. Fong]

I doubt Ledger would have appeared in a significant role - maybe a cameo - but it does bum me out that Batman hanging up the cape and cowl right after Harvey's death completely precludes any further confrontation with The Joker. Again, I'm wanting to grasp onto that "last confirmed sighting" in order to imagine that there could be more. I've always thought that "we could do this forever" line was more a nod to the eternal nature of the Batman/Joker battle in Batman mythology than it was an indication that he'd have a big role in the next one, but if we're not allowed to imagine any further battles, then that's crushed.

 

[KalMart]

I doubt Ledger would have appeared in a significant role - maybe a cameo - but it does bum me out that Batman hanging up the cape and cowl right after Harvey's death completely precludes any further confrontation with The Joker. Again, I'm wanting to grasp onto that "last confirmed sighting" in order to imagine that there could be more.

Wouldn't that have felt like a waste, though? I have a feeling you just couldn't not use him in a major way, or as the focus of it. But it does sort of narrow it to just the Batman/Joker series.

 

[Saint]

In regards to realistic injury: I guess you could say the same for Harvey in TDK (considering he looked like a zombie) but there is a difference between pain and being physically broken

Nevermind pain; Harvey would have been blind and I imagine dead from infection.

You asked "Why not for all things," well... that would be a pretty crummy movie, I think. We've got hovercrafts and leaping cars and magic steam that doesn't scald people, a guy with his face burnt off and a clown who can stealthy plant bombs everywhere, all the time, with nobody noticing, using nothing but his army of completely reliable mental cases.

Yes, you're probably right: there are ideas here that could have been handled more realistically. That would have been better. But I'm not going to bust anyone's balls about it in a series of movies that has always been picking and choosing exactly when to be realistic and when not to be.

It would be nice if everything was perfect, but in the grand scheme, it's not important. That doesn't mean making sense isn't important (believe me, quite the opposite), but it's a matter of degrees. Plot holes are to be treated on a case by case basis. Absolutes don't fly.

Incidentally, I claim no expertise, but my understanding is that herniated discs are typically treatable without surgery. Since my knowledge on the subject is limited to a ten second google search, though, we can hardly call my opinion educated.

 

[Alexia Dark]

The problem is that they take the time to establish that Bruce is in bad condition, to the point of using a cane and needing a special brace for his knee. To show that weakness and then completely disregard his human limitations after he is beaten half to death, left with severe back problems and without his aforementioned brace, is just inexcusable.

Maybe he was starting to get into shape again and heal properly by the time he fought Bane. Maybe by some miracle, you can fix a protruding vertebrae by punching it back in. But a few months of working out in a cell will not bring a human being back to full health, not even Batman.

 

[bunk]

I think I'm just bothered mostly by how little Bruce seemed to have been doing during his retirement. He didn't need to be Batman, but it would be more fitting if he just kept taking his mission as far as he could. Sure Gotham was cleaned up, but for how long? I wouldn't have like to see him developing back up plans if the Dent act was reversed or even taking his war on organized crime beyond Gotham.

 

[Saint]

I think I'm just bothered mostly by how little Bruce seemed to have been doing during his retirement. He didn't need to be Batman, but it would be more fitting if he just kept taking his mission as far as he could. Sure Gotham was cleaned up, but for how long? I wouldn't have like to see him developing back up plans if the Dent act was reversed or even taking his war on organized crime beyond Gotham.

Yeah, that would have been interesting. Maybe that's why renovations to the cave were completed even after Bruce had retired?

 

[UaalaDan]

I didn't like it either. Seemed to contradict the line "Because he can take it" at the end of TDK.

 

[Doc Samson]

My only problem is that he came back too fast. I didn't like that he seemed so frail in the beginning, but as soon as he puts his brace on, he's back. I would've liked to see more progression there, even playing up his age and condition by showing him out of shape and out of breath during his return. Not able to move like he wants to, even before facing Bane the first time. I think it would've made his "rise" from the pit even more dramatic and powerful.

But people are already complaining there wasn't enough Batman in it, so I suppose they had no recourse.

 

[DACrowe]

I do think in retrospect that they should have implied somehow that Bruce had been Batman for several years after the events of TDK. It can be implied that the rooms of Arkham are full of crazies and a new kind of freak who claim to being thrashed by the Batman, but one day (maybe after the Dent Act went into full effect), he just disappeared all together. That way, Bruce being so physically frail could make more sense and the implication would be instead of doing this for about a year and a half (BB and TDK), that he was doing it for four or five years and probably faced other "freaks" that left him drained.

I just did not feel like Batman was retiring when he rode off at the end of the last movie.

 

[the amazing fro]

I just did not feel like Batman was retiring when he rode off at the end of the last movie.

I think that's fundamentally my problem with the eight year absence. While I agree with Nolan that the lie had to be effective in order for TDK's ending to have weight, the eight year absence undermines the tragedy of TDK's ending. Any chance of happiness, any chance of Batman someday stopping his crusade seemed like an impossibility. At the end of TDK it seemed like he was destined to be Batman forever and to top it all off he had to do it as a fugitive and without Gordon's help.

The ending of TDK left Batman in a really interesting place and I really would have liked to seen Batman trying to cope with being Batman and on the run simultaneously. The Dent Act could have still been present causing Batman to gradually become more and more obsolete. Batman throws himself into his work, ignoring his responsibilities as Bruce Wayne. After he is broken by Bane, Bruce learns that he has let go of his pain and move on from Rachel's death, from the events of TDK and from being Batman. If he had remained Batman, his arc would be clearer with a more direct continuation of his character arc from the previous film.

 

[The Guard]

I think that's fundamentally my problem with the eight year absence. While I agree with Nolan that the lie had to be effective in order for TDK's ending to have weight, the eight year absence undermines the tragedy of TDK's ending. Any chance of happiness, any chance of Batman someday stopping his crusade seemed like an impossibility. At the end of TDK it seemed like he was destined to be Batman forever and to top it all off he had to do it as a fugitive and without Gordon's help

Agreed. And more to the point...he felt like he'd embraced it, as did Gordon.

The whole thing was just awkwardly handled.

 

[kvz5]

My only problem is that he came back too fast. I didn't like that he seemed so frail in the beginning, but as soon as he puts his brace on, he's back. I would've liked to see more progression there, even playing up his age and condition by showing him out of shape and out of breath during his return. Not able to move like he wants to, even before facing Bane the first time. I think it would've made his "rise" from the pit even more dramatic and powerful.

Agreed.