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

Sorry, final cut or not, if you don't think that there are SOME parameters, you're crazy.

First of all, the film must be PG-13. That's a mandate right there.

DId you even watch TDK? Joker killed a man by shoving a pencil through his skull, He burned a gangster alive on top of a pile of money. We watched a man's face burn off, then watch him walking around with a horrible, oozing injury for the rest of the film. We watched that same man die. We watched another gangster be thrown off a building simply as an interrogation technique, we watched a man explode because a bomb was implanted in his stomach...all in a PG13 movie...
How in the world do you think showing the death of Batman would not make the movie PG13?
 
No offense, but I don't buy that for a second. To borrow a phrase, Batman is too big to fail. The general audience, regardless of the fact that they may know he's mortal, do not expect Batman to die nor are they likely to give much consideration to the complications of him doing it for ever because for them the story exists only within a two hour window... and this general audience isn't nearly as interested in that "second generation" as some here are willing to believe.

If if I give you the argurment that Batman may indeed be too big to fail, (which I disagree with) you cave to remember Bruce Wayne most certainly is not too big to fail, or die.
Batman's inherent weakness is Wayne.
 
The idea of Batman "dying" makes no logical thematic sense.

Nolan's trilogy, the entire trilogy, is Batman beginning, not just the first film, every film. He's not really the full Batman we all know and love, he's still developing. We're seeing him honing his skills, facing his first major tough decisions and watching his rogues gallery slowly building.

For Kane's sake, he just now has gotten an actual Batcave (I would think).

It makes no sense in any way, shape, or form for him to die just as he is actually becoming the fully fledged Caped Crusader. It would be like Luke Skywalker getting killed in Jabba's Palace or if Micheal Corleone died in the bathroom of the restaurant.
It does make sense from a "tragic hero" stance. Not only is Bruce Wayne, in the eyes of the public, wasted potential, since he is seen as nothing but a shiftless playboy who is tarnishing his father's good name, but if Batman were to fail before being able to reach his full potential, it is doubly tragic.
It works.
 
It does make sense from a "tragic hero" stance. Not only is Bruce Wayne, in the eyes of the public, wasted potential, since he is seen as nothing but a shiftless playboy who is tarnishing his father's good name, but if Batman were to fail before being able to reach his full potential, it is doubly tragic.
It works.

I don't think that's the theme that Nolan is working with for the entire trilogy though.

And the title of the film suggests otherwise to me, as well.
 
Yes. It does. "Gotham will always need Batman." "This is your mask. Your true face is the one criminals now fear" as well as several other examples. Nolan is basically saying that Bruce is destined to be Batman forever in both Begins and TDK. killing him or having Bruce fake his death negates all of that completely.



Yeah. I do.

But Bruce Wayne is a man. Him being Batman 'forever' logically ends in Wayne's actual death, or his inability to continue to serve in the role. He can't be Batman 'forever'
 
So Nolan is ending his vision prematurerly? You know, if we're going by the fact that Batman's still in his early years, and it's 'too early' to have him die. Because if he's not, all I'm saying is that it's a possibility.

Who are you to say what Nolan's vision of Batman is? Maybe his vision of Batman is for him to die young and tragically.
Come on, people.
 
I don't think that's the theme that Nolan is working with for the entire trilogy though.

And the title of the film suggests otherwise to me, as well.

I am not confident to state this as a prediction, but, in my opinion, the Rise is a metaphor in the title, which means Batman may fall literally as a man by death, but rise as a heroic symbol. This has been used in numerous tragedies as well as religious themes. I mean there's really nothing unusual, if Nolan does intend to kill him in the end, but not let the image of what Batman meant to Goatham to cease. Moreover, the death can be seen as a tragic sarcifice one did in order to save the city, which subtly stresses that it's worth for one hero, like Batman, to die for the city in order to save thousands.

But Bruce Wayne is a man. Him being Batman 'forever' logically ends in Wayne's actual death, or his inability to continue to serve in the role. He can't be Batman 'forever'

Very true! One day Bruce will die anyway, and, most likely, as a man who went on to fight crime for the sake of others' lives. It's like a warrior's path: it's a shame for one not to die during the war, on a battlefield, in a fight with the enemy. And, I bet Bruce has learnt that from LOS.
 
Last edited:
I would say that there's a big difference between a goon getting killed off screen with a pencil (which was ****ing cool) and Batman being killed. Big difference. One's expendable and die in a funny/cool way. The other is an American icon, whose death would probably be neither funny nor cool.

??
It was onscreen. It was quick, but it was definately right up there in your face...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2ABvkq62sk
 
And once again it makes no sense for Batman to die within the confines of Nolan's own story and the themes and ideas he's been setting up for TWO movies.

??
THe themes he has been setting up is that everything that matters to Wayne gets taken from him.
His parents, his love interests, his father's company (briefly) the image he wanted of Batman being a good guy to Gotham...
He then gets "Batman" taken from him when suffers an injury at the hands of Bane (Complete supposition. Just because Bane is in the movie, it doesn't mean Bane is going to break his back, keep that in mind.), and he decides to quit. He retires, Gotham falls into chaos, he sees the only thing he has left that he cares about, Gotham, being taken from him, so he dons the suit again, and goes out for one last shot at getting it back.
He succeeds, but it costs him his life.
 
Who are you to say what Nolan's vision of Batman is? Maybe his vision of Batman is for him to die young and tragically.
Come on, people.
That's what I meant. Again, read my previous posts, I was playing devil's advocate.
 
Right. The same commissioner now tasked with apprehending said criminal. The same commissioner who, during his illustrious career, has been known to hang out on a rooftop with this guy once or twice. I wouldn't call him Mr. Reliable...

Right. Word gets out to the populace that Gordon was once allied with Batman. Batman, in attempting to clear Gordon's name, allows himself to either be captured, or "killed".
Yet another argument for Batman's 'death'.
 
If you can all excuse the length of this post, I'd like to share why and how I feel Batman dying could 'work' in some way. And why, admittedly, it would be difficult to achieve and ultimately unlikely. The reason why I point to Miller's Dark Knight Returns as possibly the only way it could work is because it's executed along some pretty vital parameters....and I believe they'd have to be met in the movie to work, too.


1. The hero is a martyr by choice. He has to foresee some sort of concrete benefit of his being dead, or being perceived to be dead. It has to be a calculated outcome, and not just the less-desirable result of the same risk he takes night in and night out. The Hero has to believe that it's the best way to ultimately achieve his larger goal. Otherwise, his death is just him dying...and its only function is that of tragedy/sympathy.

2. The hero can't die fighting a villain. He has to be fighting something that needs redemption and something that needs changing into something else, or something good that it used to be. He can only die not just saving who he's protecting, but saving who/what he's actually fighting. That's what gives his sacrifice true meaning.

3. Something has to already be in motion. Batman needs to have the utmost confidence that someone or something will carry on his mission after he's gone..and we have to see it already underway. Otherwise, if it's 50/50 or what have you, it's almost negligence and abandonment on the hero's part if he knows that his guidance and inspiration will still be needed.

In Dark Knight Returns, Batman 'died' while fighting Superman...not Joker, not Bane, not Killer Croc. He died fighting the hero of all heroes, because what Batman was really fighting was the system that the people needed to believe in. What's the point of fighting evil if there isn't a greater good to have faith in? He was fighting a system that he believed could turn around, but would never forgive him for turning it around. There would always be that conflict, so he decided that by removing himself from the equation (after he took care of business, of course), it would ultimately streamline its path towards a higher road. And Batman fully accepted death as an outcome...he had to in order to have a chance of fighting Superman and to wake him up. The only way to get to his destination was not to save anything for a trip back. The Batcave and mansion were destroyed, his personal fortune liquidated....there was no turning back. He chose this outcome, it didn't just tragically happen.

And the signs were there that the people had finally 'caught on'. It was incited by a cataclysm...a huge electromagnetic power outage that caused disasters and anarchy in the streets. But with his help, the city stepped up and banded together. They relied on eachother, and gave to help/potect others. It was something that would bring them together and keep them together like nothing before. The wheels were in motion.

So something along those lines is really the only way I could see Batman dying in TDKR, and having it be a logical, satisfying, and narratively responsible as an end to the story....even without him secretly surviving like in Dark Knight Returns. Otherwise, it could too easily be as cheap as some are fearing it would be...shock value over true narrative substance and so on. This is a hero story, after all...and if you as the storyteller believe in what the hero stands for, then his death has to stand for something in how it's planned out and executed. A hero's death has to celebrate/cement his life and his purpose, not lament his passing.

This is why I think Miller's approach in Dark Knight Returns is perhaps the only way (or at least the best way) it could work (granted, I haven't read a whole lot of Batman comics). It's also why I feel he p*ssed all over it with The Dark Knight Strikes Again. :oldrazz: ;)

But I don't know if Nolan's Batman has the 'elbow room' for something on that scale....never mind there being no Superman. Some feel that this is still just the early years of Batman, and there's much more work to be done until the end should sensibly arrive. I think that these three movies can feel like a lifetime without having to span any more than the 7-10 years of his being Batman. But I can also understand that some may need to sense more of a twilight of his career before even considering the 'end'. Chances are, Batman won't die in TDKR....but I'd still be interested in seeing how it would be handled. :O

Sorry for the rambling, y'all. :up:
Awesome post :awesome::up:
 
This thread is proof that people will debate, no matter how wrong they are.
 
:whatever:

Also, I thought the "Nolan... add Robin!!!" thread was proof of that? :oldrazz:


By it's title it was...it did become an interesting discussion though.

this one is not even close.

Batman is mortal, Christopher Nolan is not afraid to do things in his film.

Batman can die.

There's not much else to really go on about. Some might personally dislike the idea but, if you're on this board then you've enjoyed the way Nolan has made this films thus far; there's a reasonable amount of trust one ought to have when a man does good work.

There are elements about TDKR I don't find myself having a personal preference to but, I enjoyed BB and TDK and furthermore a lot of Nolan's others films.

I have trust he can make a good film, an excellent film, no matter what my preference to Batman's death is.

"it's not thematic to the films"
Thomas was the hero: died.
Harvey was the hero: died.
Batman was the hero: died.

It could work and be thematic in the films.

"It doesn't definitely end the series."

Course not; Batman's actions and the other two hours and thirty eight minutes will do that.

Arguing over the potential possibility of Batman dying isn't the right fight here. Unless you can predict the future, there's a chance.

Now the effects of Batman's Death or is survival on the general audience, the people of Gotham and the story...

THAT's interesting. That way there's no taking sides and you're engaging in thought that differs from your personal opinion for the sake of a more rounded conclusion
 
By it's title it was...it did become an interesting discussion though.

this one is not even close.

Batman is mortal, Christopher Nolan is not afraid to do things in his film.

Batman can die.

There's not much else to really go on about. Some might personally dislike the idea but, if you're on this board then you've enjoyed the way Nolan has made this films thus far; there's a reasonable amount of trust one ought to have when a man does good work.

There are elements about TDKR I don't find myself having a personal preference to but, I enjoyed BB and TDK and furthermore a lot of Nolan's others films.

I have trust he can make a good film, an excellent film, no matter what my preference to Batman's death is.

"it's not thematic to the films"
Thomas was the hero: died.
Harvey was the hero: died.
Batman was the hero: died.

It could work and be thematic in the films.

"It doesn't definitely end the series."

Course not; Batman's actions and the other two hours and thirty eight minutes will do that.

Arguing over the potential possibility of Batman dying isn't the right fight here. Unless you can predict the future, there's a chance.
Ah, I see. Yep, I agree :up:
 
Batman dying would be idiotic and would ruin the movie. The fact that he's an everlasting figure is part of the mythos. You can't kill him off.

Nolan is too smart to make a horrible decision like this.
 
B
"it's not thematic to the films"
Thomas was the hero: died.
Harvey was the hero: died.
Batman was the hero: died.

It could work and be thematic in the films.
I don't think that would work. The others have died but Batman can't die, he has to survive and carry on where the others have failed. Him becoming a martyr won't solve anything because clearly Dent's death did nothing to Gotham's citizens if their city has fallen even deeper into chaos, so how would Batman's be any different? Gotham needs Batman, and he knows that. He won't allow himself to be killed, he has to carry on and protect Gotham. The point of Batman is he is supposed to be this unwavering symbol of hope, him dying would ruin that.
 
I don't think that would work. The others have died but Batman can't die, he has to survive and carry on where the others have failed. Him becoming a martyr won't solve anything because clearly Dent's death did nothing to Gotham's citizens if their city has fallen even deeper into chaos, so how would Batman's be any different? Gotham needs Batman, and he knows that. He won't allow himself to be killed, he has to carry on and protect Gotham. The point of Batman is he is supposed to be this unwavering symbol of hope, him dying would ruin that.


Did you perhaps read the rest of my post.
 
Batman dying would be idiotic and would ruin the movie. The fact that he's an everlasting figure is part of the mythos. You can't kill him off.

Nolan is too smart to make a horrible decision like this.

He also may be smart enough to write a story in which Batman dies without it feeling like he's 'killing him off'. :O
 
Wasn't TDK melodramatic enough?

Batman taking the blame for murder and Gordon explaining that he's a dark hero just isn't enough I guess. Batman has got to die.

It'll feel so cheap and selfish of Nolan if Batman and Bruce Wayne die for "a greater good". The symbol and becoming "something more" will really take a toll on the series if they go that far. It'll totally ruin the character for me. To me, the Batman symbol is enough. All these illusions to becoming a savior, the hero gotham deserves, not the one it needs right now, yadda, yadda, yadda, sound great in context, especially with an epic blaring music theme but it all has no real basis or ground. It hasn't felt fake yet (though, as epic as TDK's ending is, it is close), but if Batman/Bruce Wayne does indeed die all that bloated drivel will come crashing down. We know that the majority of the comic populace wouldn't except such an outcome (these are the same people that have a problem with Alfred for letting Vicki into the Batcave for Christ sake) so how would General Audiences react? They'd be confused.

Last time I checked the Batman from all forms of various media has NEVER been a martyr.
 
Last edited:
As we discussed, it would have to be handled in a very specific approach to work in a narratively satisfying way...but there's probably not enough elements and time in Nolan's trilogy to do it. Besdes Batman secretly surviving, it worked well in Dark Knight Returns because it was the culmination of his 60-something years in comics, and the lifetime of a mortal man in a world with superhumans. Nolan's story is a smaller microcosm of that, so there's probably not enough there to give his death that kind of weight.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,301
Messages
22,082,546
Members
45,883
Latest member
Smotonri
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"