The Dark Knight Rises Batman: To "Die".. or Not To "Die:?

[BatScot]

He would be right to do so too.

There are any number of reasons why I do not wish to see Nolan kill off Batman not the least of which being that should he not then those who have said "he would be right to do so" will have no recourse other than to say Nolan was wrong in not doing so.

 

[Nevincer]

Reese has more of a chance of becoming The Riddler than Batman dying.

Nope.

 

[ALP]

Oh and I also hear that Joker is really perma-white under the flesh makeup under the white makeup.

 

[Solidus]

Oh and I also hear that Joker is really perma-white under the flesh makeup under the white makeup.

Well honestly this argument is just like the permawhite debate. Because so many people claimed forever it would ruin the character, it was a betrayal to everything, and they could not do it and it would fail. Then the film came out and people seemed to not say a thing about it because they realized in the context it worked.

Just like how some are not open to the idea with the evidence given above that there is a possibility that Batman may die. Since Nolan, Bale said it is a definitive ending, WB has already said they have to reboot the Bat franchise afterwards and the teaser sure gave hints to it.

To me the permawhite debate (as most remember I was always in there saying it does not ruin the character and it will still work and it did) is just like this one. Those claiming he can't die to me is almost parallel to the Joker being permawhite, some made a deal of it where it was required and the core aspect of the character, it was not.

So a death is possible, more were not wanting to believe that it is possible before the film came out of him not being permawhite. This mirrors it almost exactly.

Now am I saying he will die? No. Not at all, but I'm open to the idea that he will, mainly because there is a greater chance then ever before that he may. Not saying a greater chance, but a greater chance then ever before.

So I keep an open mind because in the end it is all about context, and execution (as it was with a non-permawhite Joker). And as before I just have faith the team knows what will be best for "their" story. However there has been some great discussion in here just like the permawhite debate, and the people I've been debating have been very civil and fun, so this I have a feeling will be the permawhite discussion all over again. But in reality I think we will have some of the most intelligent and interesting discussions in here, on both sides of the argument.

 

[Nevincer]

Well honestly this argument is just like the permawhite debate. Because so many people claimed forever it would ruin the character, it was a betrayal to everything, and they could not do it and it would fail. Then the film came out and people seemed to not say a thing about it because they realized in the context it worked.

Just like how some are not open to the idea with the evidence given above that there is a possibility that Batman may die. Since Nolan, Bale said it is a definitive ending, WB has already said they have to reboot the Bat franchise afterwards and the teaser sure gave hints to it.

To me the permawhite debate (as most remember I was always in there saying it does not ruin the character and it will still work and it did) is just like this one. Those claiming he can't die to me is almost parallel to the Joker being permawhite, some made a deal of it where it was required and the core aspect of the character, it was not.

So a death is possible, more were in denial before the film came out of him being permawhite. This mirrors it almost exactly.

Now am I saying he will die? No. Not at all, but I'm open to the idea that he will, mainly because there is a greater chance then ever before that he may. Not saying a greater chance, but a greater chance then ever before.

So I keep an open mind because in the end it is all about context, and execution (as it was with a non-permawhite Joker). And as before I just have faith the team knows what will be best for "their" story. However there has been some great discussion in here just like the permawhite debate, and the people I've been debating have been very civil and fun, so this I have a feeling will be the permawhite discussion all over again. But in reality I think we will have some of the most intelligent and interesting discussions in here, on both sides of the argument.

Excellent post

 

[Doc Samson]

Well honestly this argument is just like the permawhite debate. Because so many people claimed forever it would ruin the character, it was a betrayal to everything, and they could not do it and it would fail. Then the film came out and people seemed to not say a thing about it because they realized in the context it worked.

Just like how some are not open to the idea with the evidence given above that there is a possibility that Batman may die. Since Nolan, Bale said it is a definitive ending, WB has already said they have to reboot the Bat franchise afterwards and the teaser sure gave hints to it.

To me the permawhite debate (as most remember I was always in there saying it does not ruin the character and it will still work and it did) is just like this one. Those claiming he can't die to me is almost parallel to the Joker being permawhite, some made a deal of it where it was required and the core aspect of the character, it was not.

So a death is possible, more were in denial before the film came out of him being permawhite. This mirrors it almost exactly.

Now am I saying he will die? No. Not at all, but I'm open to the idea that he will, mainly because there is a greater chance then ever before that he may. Not saying a greater chance, but a greater chance then ever before.

So I keep an open mind because in the end it is all about context, and execution (as it was with a non-permawhite Joker). And as before I just have faith the team knows what will be best for "their" story. However there has been some great discussion in here just like the permawhite debate, and the people I've been debating have been very civil and fun, so this I have a feeling will be the permawhite discussion all over again. But in reality I think we will have some of the most intelligent and interesting discussions in here, on both sides of the argument.

Couldn't have said it better. This reminds me of the permawhite thing too, which I also was on your side in. Look, nobody is saying this is what's definitely going to happen, obviously nobody knows, but to suggest that it somehow cheapens or lessens the character is ridiculous.

Yes, plenty of unrealistic things happen in Nolan's movies, we get it, but it's also grounded in a semi-familiar world, and in this world, people die. And judging off Nolan's own words, and the imagery in the teaser, along with the tone of it, I wouldn't be surprised, or angry, if it happened. I'm sure he wouldn't want any future films attached to his in any way, because this is a very nuanced and particular vision he created. On top of that, WB has already stated plans on a reboot, so what harm, exactly, would be done?

 

[Nevincer]

Weren't people also against the Joker having the scarred smile? Specifically they hated the idea of anything close to the Bermejo Joker, when that's the closest to what we got, and the look obviously worked.

 

[Solidus]

Weren't people also against the Joker having the scarred smile? Specifically they hated the idea of anything close to the Bermejo Joker, when that's the closest to what we got, and the look obviously worked.

Ya many at first were against it. But time went on, and when the film came out it changed.

 

[Nevincer]

Ya many at first were against it. But time went on, and when the film came out it changed.

I see this being similar to the Catwoman goggles argument that's going on right now.

 

[BatScot]

Well honestly this argument is just like the permawhite debate.

Oh c'mon... the death of Batman is nothing like the permawhite debate—whether one liked the idea or not the essence of the Joker can be conveyed regardless of the look being permawhite or makeup; only the backstory changes. In contrast the death Batman is so dissimilar, both in terms of context and effect, so as to render the comparison moot.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Weren't people also against the Joker having the scarred smile? Specifically they hated the idea of anything close to the Bermejo Joker, when that's the closest to what we got, and the look obviously worked.

I personally have never been a fan of the Bermejo Joker, and when I saw that first picture of Heath, I was quite upset. However, I'll admit it worked in the film, and I had no issues with it by the time the movie came out.

Solidus is right. It's just like the perma-white argument. Nolan could write a story in which Batman has to die to save Gotham, and it is beautiful and poetic and it works, and I think that most of us would honestly be okay with it. I don't want him to die, and I think WB may want to keep him alive in hopes of keeping continuity with a future series of Batman movies, but I don't know. It's not the end of the world if he does die in the same way it wasn't the end of the world that Joker had a Glasgow smile or that he wore white makeup.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Oh c'mon... the death of Batman is nothing like the permawhite debate—whether one liked the idea or not the essence of the Joker can be conveyed regardless of the look being permawhite or makeup; only the backstory changes. In contrast the death Batman is so dissimilar, both in terms of context and effect, so as to render the comparison moot.

Yeah, because he hasn't died in the comics or anything...

 

[TheBatman072]

Yeah, because he hasn't died in the comics or anything...

Yeah. And death in comic books is ALWAYS a sure thing.

 

[KalMart]

Neither has Two-Face either, right?

 

[Solidus]

Oh c'mon... the death of Batman is nothing like the permawhite debate—whether one liked the idea or not the essence of the Joker can be conveyed regardless of the look being permawhite or makeup; only the backstory changes. In contrast the death Batman is so dissimilar, both in terms of context and effect, so as to render the comparison moot.

Honestly I was expecting you to say just this. And trust me Batscot, there were so many that said it would DESTROY the core of the Joker and therefore Batman, and the entire film. I'm sorry it is perfect proof of something some saying it was the "core" of the character not to have make up, and the "core" of Batman can't die. (Even though again him dying i the comics gives backing of source material to do so and adapting it in different ways) People made as big of a deal about it, I know because I spent a year on the make up thread posting tons.

The point is that there are some that don't' accept that in context and if done right it will work. That is the point. That if the events surrounding it work, and the death itself works, either it be him in old age, flashing forward, or dying in some other way. (which is interesting if they did it old age would it not?) But again if it works in context then people will be happy. If it does not of course that is another story. But these are more similar to me then anything.

 

[H8terDVader]

If Nolan is smart he will die.
DC Comics may not like it but Nolan will want to end it. The ONLY problem I have with that is potentially "ignoring" all the other Characters from the Batman Universe.
But BATMAN Dies!

 

[Doc Holliday]

Yeah. And death in comic books is ALWAYS a sure thing.

True, but who's to say they can't just make a new Batman movie in a few years and ignore the death of Bats (if it be the will of Nolan The Vest)?

 

[KalMart]

True, but who's to say they can't just make a new Batman movie in a few years and ignore the death of Bats (if it be the will of Nolan The Vest)?

They can.

 

[TheBatman072]

True, but who's to say they can't just make a new Batman movie in a few years and ignore the death of Bats (if it be the will of Nolan The Vest)?

Who's to say they can't just reboot the whole thing even if Batman lives?

Like movie studios have done for decades now?

 

[Nevincer]

Who's to say they can't just reboot the whole thing even if Batman lives?

Because it's unnecessary, really. If Nolan was only interested in showing Batman's 'early years' with this trilogy, why stop there? Why not allow someone else to carry it on? Sure, people all over these boards will say it's because it would tarnish the image of Nolan's Batman, but Nolan to me looks like a man with much more humility, who would openly accept such a thing unless he wanted to complete his Batman's story, as in finishing his mission, or his 'journey' as the trailer alluded. If it's still open-ended, if there's more to be told about the mythos from Nolan's interpretation, why reboot it?

 

[TheBatman072]

Because it's unnecessary, really.

Really? So...WB rebooting the Batman franchise after Burton's/Schumacher's movies was unnecessary? Spider-Man being rebooted after Raimi's 2.5 great movies is unnecessary? Hulk and X-Men and even to an extent Superman all being rebooted is unnecessary? Really?

No. They were ALWAYS going to reboot Batman after Nolan was done. And rebooting doesn't always mean "origin story." It means new actors, new directors, new creative visions and directions.

And why reboot it?

MONEY.

 

[Nevincer]

Really? So...WB rebooting the Batman franchise after Burton's/Schumacher's movies was unnecessary? Spider-Man being rebooted after Raimi's 2.5 great movies is unnecessary? Hulk and X-Men and even to an extent Superman all being rebooted is unnecessary? Really?

No. They were ALWAYS going to reboot Batman after Nolan was done. And rebooting doesn't always mean "origin story." It means new actors, new directors, new creative visions and directions.

And why reboot it?

MONEY.

Are you serious?

Spider-Man 4 was in production and got rebooted allegedly because they couldn't get it out by 2012, and Sony needed this in order to maintain the rights to the character. It was also around the time that the plot details for the Vulture and Vulturess were leaked out, and the movie got slagged off to hell by the fans for those horrible ideas, so suffice to say it got rebooted for the same kind of backlash as Schumacher's films.

Superman Returns failed critically, Hulk failed critically, X-men: 3 and Wolverine failed critically, and Spider-Man 3 failed critically.

On the other hand, Nolan's Batman trilogy is widely acclaimed and hasn't gone in any poor direction so far. There's a massive difference.

 

[TheBatman072]

Are you serious?

Spider-Man 4 was in production and got rebooted allegedly because they couldn't get it out by 2012, and Sony needed this in order to maintain the rights to the character. It was also around the time that the plot details for the Vulture and Vulturess were leaked out, and the movie got slagged off to hell by the fans for those horrible ideas, so suffice to say it got rebooted for the same kind of backlash as Schumacher's films.

Superman Returns failed critically, Hulk failed critically, X-men: 3 and Wolverine failed critically, and Spider-Man 3 failed critically.

On the other hand, Nolan's Batman trilogy is widely acclaimed and hasn't gone in any poor direction so far. There's a massive difference.

So? Your logic is that because movies came before it, why bother rebooting them? That's what you are saying. Nothing about quality or any of that.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Who's to say they can't just reboot the whole thing even if Batman lives?

Like movie studios have done for decades now?

I'm not arguing for Bats to die necessarily, just pointing out that it is a conceivable outcome that wouldn't have irreparable ramifications on future Batman movies. So if it falls into place in Nolan's story, why not do it?

 

[TheBatman072]

I'm not arguing for Bats to die necessarily, just pointing out that it is a conceivable outcome that wouldn't have irreparable ramifications on future Batman movies. So if it falls into place in Nolan's story, why not do it?

Because it completely negates Nolan's story.