The Dark Knight Rises Characterization of the Knight - Nolan and Bale's Bruce Wayne/Batman - Part 1

[JackWhite]

I feel like the conversation is getting confused.

...I'm not speaking in terms of consideration for Bruce's demons etc. What I'm addressing precedes even that.

I'm saying, 'It doesn't work if we couldn't have pictured them (Batman exisitng or not) as a couple'.

^ In that case, there is no romance to lose.

Like, does it seem as if these people even like each other? Do they have an ease and compatibility (Batman existing or not)?

I thought that the story was supposed to make us care that he lost a chance at romance. If their chemistry is such that it appears as if that couldn't have a possibility, then his loss lessens.

In BB they did. Up until the end where she said the man she loved never came back after the 7 year exile. So it makes sense in TDK that the chemistry they once had, that closeness; was no more.

 

[Brother Jack]

I thought that the story was supposed to make us care that he lost a chance at romance. If their chemistry is such that it appears as if that couldn't have a possibility, then his loss lessens.

I get what you're saying. For me, there was chemistry between them but they had major forces at work that were making their romance increasingly futile. It was the same in Begins, where by the end of the movie Rachel essentially tells Bruce that she doesn't want to be with him as long as Batman is in his life.

 

[TheVerbos]

You're right. It was a foregone conclusion. I just feel like that saps some of the power out of her death. If their relationship was already sort of dead then the loss feels less potent.

 

[BestGirl]

No problem. I must confess that I'm also looking forward to Laurel Canyon because of...ahem, Kate Beckinsale.



Is it just me or does the bolded part go unnoticed a lot of times when it comes to discussing TDK? That's always one of the aspects I took away from TDK, that despite Harvey being practically an angelic savior in the eyes of Gotham's citizens, it was actually Bruce/Batman who proved that he was the better man, the true hero in the end. Every time I watch TDK and it moves towards the end I think 'how does Batman keep going after all of the **** he's been through?'...and to do what he does at the end in spite of all he's been through, that right there is why I feel TDK is rather tragic in a way. I also feel that this particular aspect is a comment on human nature's habit of overlooking and not recognising the merits of true heroes.

That's why I got a lump in my throat when Gordon said in his speech, "Not the hero we deserved but the one we needed. Nothing less than a knight, shining." Everyone thought he was referring to Harvey but it really referenced Batman.

 

[Brother Jack]

You're right. It was a foregone conclusion. I just feel like that saps some of the power out of her death. If their relationship was already sort of dead then the loss feels less potent.

I feel more for Harvey in that way. I pity Bruce because his dream was shattered (two fold with Dent's fall) and the responsibility he feels. After all, it was ultimately his fault that it all happened. He crossed the line first.

 

[TheVerbos]

That's why I got a lump in my throat when Gordon said in his speech, "Not the hero we deserved but the one we needed. Nothing less than a knight, shining." Everyone thought he was referring to Harvey but it really referenced Batman.

Really? I thought he felt that Batman was the hero Gotham deserved (Gotham deserves the best, Batman was a superior hero to Dent). However, Dent was the one they needed (his reputation to keep the criminals locked away).

 

[The Joker]

I feel more for Harvey in that way. I pity Bruce because his dream was shattered (two fold with Dent's fall) and the responsibility he feels. After all, it was ultimately his fault that it all happened. He crossed the line first.

I felt just as bad for Bruce. That final scene where Dent says "Why was it me who was the only one who lost everything?" and Batman quietly responds "It wasn't". You could hear the pain in his voice. See it in his face. He was hurting just as much as Harvey and he couldn't tell him.

Plus there was that great aftermath scene with Alfred after Rachel dies, where he's sitting unmasked in the penthouse.

 

[BestGirl]

Really? I thought he felt that Batman was the hero Gotham deserved (Gotham deserves the best, Batman was a superior hero to Dent). However, Dent was the one they needed (his reputation to keep the criminals locked away).

Yeah, that is a better way of interpreting that line.

 

[Brother Jack]

I felt just as bad for Bruce. That final scene where Dent says "Why was it me who was the only one who lost everything?" and Batman quietly responds "It wasn't". You could hear the pain in his voice. See it in his face. He was hurting just as much as Harvey and he couldn't tell him.

Plus there was that great aftermath scene with Alfred after Rachel dies, where he's sitting unmasked in the penthouse.

Yeah, I definitely saw and felt his pain, but there's a certain tragic irony with it in that in a way he lost something that he never really had. Alfred wisely keeps him in the dark about Rachel's actual decision, which I also found ironic because Rachel would have likely saw that as a betrayal.

Also, you can extrapolate a lot from the line "It wasn't". Bruce has lost more than Harvey can imagine: Rachel, his parents, his normalcy, and Harvey himself. Yet he doesn't fold.

 

[TheVerbos]

I feel more for Harvey in that way. I pity Bruce because his dream was shattered (two fold with Dent's fall) and the responsibility he feels. After all, it was ultimately his fault that it all happened. He crossed the line first.

Hmm. I sort of feel like he actually isn't to blame. If Batman hadn't been so successful, then the Joker wouldn't have been hired. However, if crime hadn't become so pervasive and all encompassing, then Batman wouldn't have existed.

You can read it that the criminals forced his hand before he forced theirs.

 

[The Batman]

I felt just as bad for Bruce. That final scene where Dent says "Why was it me who was the only one who lost everything?" and Batman quietly responds "It wasn't". You could hear the pain in his voice. See it in his face. He was hurting just as much as Harvey and he couldn't tell him.

Plus there was that great aftermath scene with Alfred after Rachel dies, where he's sitting unmasked in the penthouse.

I actually feel worse for Bruce. His whole life sucks. His parents get killed, he sacrifices his life to maintain an ideal and suffers physically for it, has people dying because he wont turn himself in, is in love with his best friend who has moved on, and has destroyed any chance of batman being a positive image...

At least Harvey can be at peace now.

 

[TheVerbos]

Yeah, I definitely saw and felt his pain, but there's a certain tragic irony with it in that in a way he lost something that he never really had. Alfred wisely keeps him in the dark about Rachel's actual decision, which I also found ironic because Rachel would have likely saw that as a betrayal.

Also, you can extrapolate a lot from the line "It wasn't". Bruce has lost more than Harvey can imagine: Rachel, his parents, his normalcy, and Harvey himself. Yet he doesn't fold.

Yeah, true. Well put.

 

[kvz5]

Oh yeah, not to take anything away from Harvey, but Bruce definitely lost more and I felt more sorry for him.

And it looks like he'll be getting a much even bigger dose of pain in TDKR.

 

[craigdbfan]

Wayne has had it rough. Re watching this really puts it into perspective.

I really feel bad for him.

 

[The Batman]

Whoa, I just realized Happy Jack and I said the same thing, except Happy Jack said it first and a whole lot better.

 

[AnneFan]

Oh yeah, not to take anything away from Harvey, but Bruce definitely lost more and I felt more sorry for him.

Indeed. It's important to show that The Joker isn't completely correct about people having one bad day and snapping, ala his point to prove attitude in The Killing Joke. Batman manages to soldier on.

 

[Brother Jack]

Hmm. I sort of feel like he actually isn't to blame. If Batman hadn't been so successful, then the Joker wouldn't have been hired. However, if crime hadn't become so pervasive and all encompassing, then Batman wouldn't have existed.

You can read it that the criminals forced his hand before he forced theirs.

I guess it's a bit of a chicken/egg scenario. But in TDK Bruce makes specific decisions/mistakes that lead to Rachel's death.

Whoa, I just realized Happy Jack and I said the same thing, except Happy Jack said it first and a whole lot better.

Thankyousir.

 

[craigdbfan]

I guess it's a bit of a chicken/egg scenario. But in TDK Bruce makes specific decisions/mistakes that lead to Rachel's death.

Definitely.

His campaign on dropping off the load on Harvey's shoulders so he could have a chance with Rachel was his biggest mistake. You could see this seething undercurrent of jealousy the most when he crashes their dinner. Using both his persona's as Wayne and Batman to achieve this throughout the course of the film.

While I think Wayne genuinely thought he could prop Dent to be the new savior of Gotham, I also believe he was blinded by the immense dangers he was throwing Dent and Rachel in due to his deep desire to get a chance in starting an actual romantic relationship with her.

He really set the gears in motion for Rachel's demise and Dent's disfigurement. It definitely seems as if TDKR is showing the immense psychological bruise that this incident left on Wayne to the point where he confines himself in the manner as a sort of self induced punishment.

 

[MrWayne]

I still dont think Bruce did any of what he did in TDK specifically for Rachel. I feel she was an afterthought. It's shown to us that Bruce still has feelings for her and yes she is significant to him in a very dear and special way. But I dont think Bruce was championing in Dent to steal Rachel away so that they could live happily ever after. I just think that Bruce's mission was his first true love, and yes at some point he hoped he could be with Rachel after his mission was over. I def don't think Bruce was maliciously plotting to hand over Gotham to Dent so that he'd have his hands full and be too busy to notice Rachel having candle light dinners with him at Wayne manor.

I think, had there been another DA who was just as sincere in wanting to rid Gotham of crime, things would have went down the same way. Bruce would still be looking for a way out, and after Gotham was in good hands, THEN he could be with Rachel and have a good life.

Only difference is that Rachel would still be alive. Her death was by association, not circumstance.

 

[The Caped Knight]

You can't blame Bruce for wanting to have a life out side of being Batman, Being Batman isn't as easier as we've see in the comics prior to Dc's New 52 crap interpretation. Bruce's has had to sacrifice personal attachment in order to keep himself from being vulnerable the problem is that the truth is Bruce does have a heart and Alfred knows it too. And even though Bruce is married to his role being Batman he needs companionship to prevent him from going completely down the path of loner . Ego the need of Robin, Nightwing, Batgirl and Gordon.

But that's not the main issue right now or even a factor in this discussion . Bruce needs to redeem himself from the error he decided between himself and Gordon about taking Dent's crime, while his act was noble, he left Gotham unprotected and abandoned (Yes their is peace time in the beginning of TDKR) but the rises of Bane could've been avoided similar to "Vengeance of Bane" in which Bane says to his gang that he can't touch Gotham City yet until he breaks their spirit of the citizens by destroying the symbol The Bat represent to the people.

Bane knew that taking Batman head on he'd fail , so he strategical studied him and caused a massive breakout at Arkham Asylum to wear him down and attacked him at his most vulnerable point to beat and break him in his own home.

 

[craigdbfan]

I still dont think Bruce did any of what he did in TDK specifically for Rachel. I feel she was an afterthought. It's shown to us that Bruce still has feelings for her and yes she is significant to him in a very dear and special way. But I dont think Bruce was championing in Dent to steal Rachel away so that they could live happily ever after. I just think that Bruce's mission was his first true love, and yes at some point he hoped he could be with Rachel after his mission was over. I def don't think Bruce was maliciously plotting to hand over Gotham to Dent so that he'd have his hands full and be too busy to notice Rachel having candle light dinners with him at Wayne manor.

I think, had there been another DA who was just as sincere in wanting to rid Gotham of crime, things would have went down the same way. Bruce would still be looking for a way out, and after Gotham was in good hands, THEN he could be with Rachel and have a good life.

Only difference is that Rachel would still be alive. Her death was by association, not circumstance.

It wasn't malicious in intent. It was naive and irresponsible. Granted there were plenty of other factors that also led to Rachel's death that were somewhat out of his control. As for Wayne intentionally trying to break up Dent and Rachel I think he definitely was. Nolan does a close up of Wayne looking at them holding hands during the dinner and soon after proclaiming to throw him a fundraiser. He was trying to expediently rid Gotham of all its problems through Dent so he wouldn't have to be Batman anymore.

That's not malicious per say but infantile behavior in him wanting Rachel to meet up to what she told him at the end of Begins.

Another aspect that TDK subtly show's is that Batman in the beginning sort of disregards and underestimates the Joker. The way he replies to Gordon when it comes to the Joker in the beginning by saying "Him again" & "One man or the entire mob? He can wait". In truth had he concentrated his efforts on the Joker earlier then he would have saved himself a great deal of trouble.

 

[Victarion]

I like how TDK began with the implication that Bruce had been busting his tail against the mob. I'm very interested in seeing how he reacts to Bane becoming a twisted version of the symbol that he set out to become.

 

[Nave 'Torment']

No problem. I must confess that I'm also looking forward to Laurel Canyon because of...ahem, Kate Beckinsale.

I think you'll love Beckinsale there -- she definitely gets much more to work with than Selene in Underworld. It also stars Natascha McElhone, who isn't hard on the eyes either

That's always one of the aspects I took away from TDK, that despite Harvey being practically an angelic savior in the eyes of Gotham's citizens, it was actually Bruce/Batman who proved that he was the better man, the true hero in the end. Every time I watch TDK and it moves towards the end I think 'how does Batman keep going after all of the **** he's been through?'...and to do what he does at the end in spite of all he's been through, that right there is why I feel TDK is rather tragic in a way. I also feel that this particular aspect is a comment on human nature's habit of overlooking and not recognising the merits of true heroes.

I couldn't agree more -- there's a reason why the self-proclaimed saviour isn't the hero of this trilogy, why it is at the end of the day, Batman (or more specifically, Bruce Wayne) who has to endure all that and still continue to live on. That last bit is only highlighted further by the fact that most people are not only considering Batman to be a non-hero, but a downright evil being. And DAMN IT -- Bruce himself DIES at that point.

If Nolan wasn't bent on ending the trilogy with the next chapter, what follows after TDK, in my mind, has always been the brooding and dehumanised Batman we know from tradition. The unsung hero.

And... y'know, Harvey's role as the "Apollo" and the "White Knight" really makes me think of him as Superman. I wonder if Goyer will bring any of that initial sense of hope when he's characterising him in the Man of Steel.

I don't think the lack of chemistry between the performers was intentional. If that were case, why would we feel a loss if they didn't end up together? It lessens the impact if we truly didn't feel as if they could be together.

Well, they didn't really have that many scenes together did they? When they did it always had a third element so that they were barely conversing with themselves. The first scene at the restaurant had Bruce being flippant for the sake of it; their exchange on the balcony was Bruce basically telling her how sincere he was (like during the "not who you are underneath" scene from BB), and the last one before they break apart, Bruce is clearly dejected by what he has to do. I always saw that Bruce wanted for something more to happen but he wasn't getting anything in return -- I don't know if it was intentional or not, and frankly it doesn't mater to me as a viewer what the intended effect was, but their lack of spark translated well into the story they were telling.

^ Not only that, but from interviews and comments, you were supposed to get the idea that, up until she wrote that letter, Rachel was truly having a hard time choosing between the two men.

I got that feeling when she couldn't give Harvey a straight answer at the fundraiser.

To Maggie's credit, I think she really pulled off the inner conflict of not knowing which man she wanted to be with in that specific scene. I think that might have been her best scene in the entire film, IMO.

Yeah, that shot of her sighing with frustration at Harvey is classic in that regard. Harvey clearly sees through her but then she sees Bruce pulling a Batman and is like "dude wtf is wrong is you?!"

I feel like the conversation is getting confused.

...I'm not speaking in terms of consideration for Bruce's demons etc. What I'm addressing precedes even that.

I'm saying, 'It doesn't work if we couldn't have pictured them (Batman exisitng or not) as a couple'.

^ In that case, there is no romance to lose.

Like, does it seem as if these people even like each other? Do they have an ease and compatibility (Batman existing or not)?

I thought that the story was supposed to make us care that he lost a chance at romance. If their chemistry is such that it appears as if that couldn't have a possibility, then his loss lessens.

Yeah... but you have to admit, they really weren't meant to be anyway. Not when he kept making her "his only hope for a normal life"

(and holy **** i just realised that's exactly what my friend was trying to tell me the other day: don't objectify her as some kind of a muse)

 

[Nave 'Torment']

Oh yeah, not to take anything away from Harvey, but Bruce definitely lost more and I felt more sorry for him.

And it looks like he'll be getting a much even bigger dose of pain in TDKR.

I think it goes back to the fact that **** just got real. TDK ended with a Gotham City that needed Harvey Dent more than it needed Batman, and a lot of people assumed that's how the legacy of Batman would end -- succeeding with a "hero with a face" (including Bruce) but the truth as it is coming out in less than 25 days... is that all those trials and scars that Wayne underwent was for this final moment he's about to face...

Desey Desey Bah-Sah-Rah

 

[Baneis8feettall]

What Harvey lost:
His Girlfriend & Potential wife.
Half of his face.
Career.
Innocence (become killer,quite rightfully after all these)
His life.

What Batman lost:
The girl rejected him and her lover.

What Harvey got:
Harvey Dent Day, stickers and such.

What Bruce got:
No need to be Batman, safe & nice Gotham and going parties with Talia & Catwoman instead friendship of Rachel.

That's more like it, Mr.Wayne.