• We experienced a brief downtime due to a Xenforo server configuration update. This was an attempt to limit bot traffic. They have rolled back and the site is now operating normally. Apologies for the inconvinience.

The Dark Knight Rises Could Gotham ever really recover? (Spoilers)

redhawk23

Wrestlin'
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Messages
17,137
Reaction score
293
Points
73
So I've just been thinking about the ramifications of the events of this film. To be certain Batman save millions of lives but could the city itself ever really function? Obviously certain things are back in order if they have the time and resources to install a statue of batman but really would any city really recover from what happened in this film?

First of all the government of the city was overthrown, the mayor killed and surely many officials pushed out onto the ice. The city lived in pretty much anarchy for months.

Also the degree to which the infrastructure of the city was demolished, bridges destroyed, streets crumbled.

And then there's the matter of the fallout from the nuclear bomb that went off right off the coast.

It simply wouldn't be healthy for people to stay and many people would abandon gotham a soon as they could. What kind of economy could the city possibly even maintain? What businesses would move into a city where the citizens executed boardmembers?

This isn't a criticism of the film at all just something I've been thinking about. What do you all think?
 
Yeah, even if you ignore the whole fallout thing, Gotham would be pretty messed up after this film.
 
I was thinking during the film that there could surely be no way back from this, things were just too messed up. Cities have recovered from huge natural disasters in the past though so I guess over time it could recover.
 
Barbra was the smartest character in this entire trilogy for actually coming to the realization of just moving to a different city/town/state. :funny:
 
New Mayor, Gordon with a clean slate, Blake prepared to be "Nightwing" just in case.

Bruce Wayne's story is done and Gotham should be able to endure.
 
Seriously though would it? I mean on a thematic level sure, just leave it at that, but Gordon was right when he described it as a clean slate.

At best the city would be like Detroit after an earthquake.

And what do you do about the citizens who were totally into the situation? I mean there is precedent, its not as if the post-Katrina looters were largely put on trial ever.
 
Well in the comics Gotham recovered after No man's Land, I think that perhaps with time it can one day rise back to whatever former glory it had.
 
If it's supposed to be America's economic and financial power (a la New York) since it has the STock Exchange and literally Wall Street....maybe...

I don't know, honestly. If it is like any other city Chicago on downwards, getting taken over by a lunatic "revolutionary" with a nuke for nearly half a year would not really entice businesses to move there. In fact, I imagine there's a mass exodus from the city after the bridges are fixd. Yeah, I think it is game over for Gotham after that.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"