The Dark Knight Rises How long before the fan community turns on the Nolan films?

[Green Goblin]

Well Atleast there wasn't any Bat nipples or close ups of private areas.

 

[Arawn Fenn]

I understand it was a visual metaphor and all that, but I'm sorry, if full grown men can't make that jump, there's no way in hell a little kid who's grown up in a pit her whole life is going to be able to, no matter how scared she was.

Doesn't she have the advantage of being lighter in weight?

 

[The Joker]

I wasn't a fan of Blake's "deduction" either. I wouldn't have minded if they had used it in addition to multiple other things. He had a hunch as a kid, as he got older he did some digging, maybe found Mr. Reese.

Or even simpler, he realized "hmm, who would have enough money to fund a personal war on crime and buy a car that's essentially a tank?"

Exactly.

Almost anything would have been better than "I recognized that look on your face"

 

[Green Goblin]

Exactly.

Almost anything would have been better than "I recognized that look on your face"

This

 

[BatLobster]

Almost anything would have been more tedious and exposition heavy than him simply knowing, I can agree to that much.

 

[Tequilla]

I wasn't a fan of Blake's "deduction" either. I wouldn't have minded if they had used it in addition to multiple other things. He had a hunch as a kid, as he got older he did some digging, maybe found Mr. Reese.

The first time we meet Blake , he talks to Gordon about the night Dent died and his suspicious regarding everything. It's established right there the nature of the character.

 

[craigdbfan]

Bones, feelings, deep down and stuff.

 

[Squaremaster316]

For me it was, especially with it's contrived plot points that take it back to film 1 and change things up.

Then again, Bernard's revelation about Norman is nowhere near as bad as Blake's revelation based on "I knew who you were based in your face and a feeling I had in my bones". He was also a better Butler in the end.

Waiting until Harry went after Peter the first time which resulted in amnesia, then letting him terrorize MJ, then letting half of his face get disfigured, then waiting for Harry to try to go after Peter AGAIN...and THAT'S when he decides to let Harry know?

This character is completely f***ing useless and one of the worst written in any film.

He's like Homer in the grifting episode.

- Guilty! Carjacker Willie, I sentence you to 10 years in prison!

- Dad, tell them!

- When the time is right.

- (Pulls out gun) No! You'll never send me up the river!

- Dad.

- Let's see where he's going with this.

- Willie, as your employer, I insist- (Shoot's Skinner) Oh!

- Stop! This has gone on just long enough!

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Yeah, Bernard the Butler was horrendous. It made zero sense, but it was also an almost nonexistant character is a terrible movie.

 

[milost]

Waiting until Harry went after Peter the first time which resulted in amnesia, then letting him terrorize MJ, then letting half of his face get disfigured, then waiting for Harry to try to go after Peter AGAIN...and THAT'S when he decides to let Harry know?

This character is completely f***ing useless and one of the worst written in any film.

And so is Alfred in TDKR.

He waited 8 long years to finally tell Bruce about the letter. When does he tell him? Right at the time that Bruce and Batman needs him the most. Alfred was looking to leave, I guess so Bruce would "snap out of it". But had Bruce done that, the city would have been destroyed. Alfred's great suggestion was that Bruce should help the proper authorities with his Wayne tech, yet we see how incompetent the GCPD actually is in the film and what happens when said technology falls into the wrong hands.

- Alfred attempts to destroy Bruce's world

- He tries to hook him up with chimpanzees, but worse yet, villains that he knows little about

- Abandons his Master, his surrogate son at a time when the city needs Batman the most



Compare this to the Dark Knight where Alfred hands Bruce his cowl back and says things like, "Batman can make the choice that no one else can make, the right choice" and it's just ridiculous. Yeah, I get Alfred was afraid to lose Bruce, but I highly doubt that wasn't going through his mind during Begins and especially the Dark Knight.

He couldn't have picked a better time to have left the city. Too bad he didn't have a heart attack or a stroke when he saw the city get taken by Bane and the "LoS" with Bruce/Batman nowhere to be found.

Atleast Beranard was a throwaway character that got a little bit of screen time in the end of the series. Alfred was the exact opposite, he does a 180 and devolves into this blubbering mess of a character with little to no time in the third one. They should have just used him as a different type of catalyst and killed him off by Bane or something. Show that not all the main characters can live, kill off the rest of Bruce's family and have a bittersweet ending where Bruce looks for Alfred at the cafe, but realizes his butler will never get to witness the dream he had always wanted. But nah, Alfred is hardly developed in TDKR for any reason except trying to pull at the audiences heart strings and trying to put Batman threw the ****ter.

 

[DACrowe]

Funny thing is, if Batman made a deduction like that in the comics about a villain, everybody would be like, "Okay. Greatest detective, yep..." and kept on going.

Is it the perfect explanation? No. But the acting in the scene sells it. And if his name was Dick Grayson, half of this hate would not exist.

 

[DACrowe]

And so is Alfred in TDKR.

He waited 8 long years to finally tell Bruce about the letter. When does he tell him? Right at the time that Bruce and Batman needs him the most. Alfred was looking to leave, I guess so Bruce would "snap out of it". But had Bruce done that, the city would have been destroyed. Alfred's great suggestion was that Bruce should help the proper authorities with his Wayne tech, yet we see how incompetent the GCPD actually is in the film and what happens when said technology falls into the wrong hands.

- Alfred attempts to destroy Bruce's world

- He tries to hook him up with chimpanzees, but worse yet, villains that he knows little about

- Abandons his Master, his surrogate son at a time when the city needs Batman the most



Compare this to the Dark Knight where Alfred hands Bruce his cowl back and says things like, "Batman can make the choice that no one else can make, the right choice" and it's just ridiculous. Yeah, I get Alfred was afraid to lose Bruce, but I highly doubt that wasn't going through his mind during Begins and especially the Dark Knight.

He couldn't have picked a better time to have left the city. Too bad he didn't have a heart attack or a stroke when he saw the city get taken by Bane and the "LoS" with Bruce/Batman nowhere to be found.

Atleast Beranard was a throwaway character that got a little bit of screen time in the end of the series. Alfred was the exact opposite, he does a 180 and devolves into this blubbering mess of a character with little to no time in the third one. They should have just used him as a different type of catalyst and killed him off by Bane or something. Show that not all the main characters can live, kill off the rest of Bruce's family and have a bittersweet ending where Bruce looks for Alfred at the cafe, but realizes his butler will never get to witness the dream he had always wanted. But nah, Alfred is hardly developed in TDKR for any reason except trying to pull at the audiences heart strings and trying to put Batman threw the ****ter.

Okay, this is utter BS. I usually don't usually say that to another poster, but are you really comparing Alfred's motivations and character arc to Bernard from SM3?

Yes, Alfred was a champion of Batman in TDK, because the only way things could be fixed or get better is if Bruce did not give up and he needed the moral support, particularly after Rachel died. That is also why he burned the letter. So, Bruce could endure and live on.

However, after eight years of Bruce doing the opposite, of refusing to live (even if he didn't give up Batman overnight and was doing the fusion energy project up until 3 years prior to TDKR, he was likely hallow inside), he could not let it go on when Batman turned from a noble cause into a death wish. Not to mention it was in a time when Gotham appeared to have gotten better.

Does Alfred have selfish reasons for telling Bruce to not become Batman again? Yes, but they are rational. Bruce has a death wish, which pretty much comes to pass when he faces Bane, it is just that Bane does the stupid comic book villain thing of sparing the hero's life. Otherwise, Alfred was proven right and, surprise surprise, Bane was able to complete his diabolical plan anyway.

Yes, Alfred leaves and tells Bruce the truth, but only because he is hoping to save Bruce's life. He kept the letter secret to spare Bruce pain, but he sees that it has rotted away at him to the point where he is ready to die. Of course, Alfred will not spill the truth, thereby (seemingly) dissolving their friendship, unless it became a life or death situation, which it did.

As for setting him up with "villains," have you never seen friends try to help a widow/widower/divorcee or whatever get back out in the world. And choosing the beautiful and friendly colleague as a rebound is not exactly the same as saying go to the nearest biker bar to get started.

 

[milost]

Okay, this is utter BS. I usually don't usually say that to another poster, but are you really comparing Alfred's motivations and character arc to Bernard from SM3?

Yup.

Spider-Man 3 and TDKR have the same, lame "threequel" problems where the writers take the contrived story explanations route. "During film one, this happened", "now this character knows or felt this way", "this didn't happen, this happened".

The thing with Bernard is lame. He didn't even have much of a voice in the first two Spider-Man films (though he did show some concern in Spider-Man 2 I guess). But Alfred by TDKR is lame too. He holds that letter over Bruce's head for those long 8 years the same way Bernard held the fact that Norman killed himself. It's the same thing.

They both have the "threequel" writing problem of going back to film 1 and adding crap that wasn't even there. In Spider-Man, the first person to see Peter lay Norman on that sofa is Harry. Bernard isn't even in the scene. But yet, here comes Spider-Man 3 saying that "oh, Bernard cleaned Norman's wounds and had no doubt that the wound was self-inflicted. Same deal with Alfred. In Batman Begins, there isn't even the slightest hint that Alfred was hoping for Bruce to never come back and yet, here comes TDKR with "mastuh weyne, when you were gone dos 7 years, dos 7 years before batman begins, I bloody hoped that you lived a good life and vacationed to Florence Italy every year of those 7 years and to hope you had a wife and maybe some kids".


Yeah, I'm not sure which one is actually worse.

Yes, Alfred was a champion of Batman in TDK, because the only way things could be fixed or get better is if Bruce did not give up and he needed the moral support, particularly after Rachel died. That is also why he burned the letter. So, Bruce could endure and live on.

And he does move on . . . in The Dark Knight. Bruce isn't all doom and gloom, they're quipping about Batpods not being very subtle during the day, Batman is practically at his best saving the day, etc. etc.

But then sometime during the exposition filled 8 years he becomes a piece of crap, literally worthless and uninspiring. Yet Alfred NEVER tells him about the letter.








UNTIL . . .



Bruce starts to get back in the groove of things. He's fixing up his knee, he's investigating the pearls, looking for this Bane guy, visiting Gordon, visiting Fox, LIVING again. So what does Alfred do? He selfishly spills the beans and turns the tables on Bruce. Why? Because "he cares for him". That's bull. If that's the case, why not tell him sooner. Because he had a supposed death wish? He looked like he was fairing better in the Batsuit, shagging Miranda Tate, following the Catlady around and getting awesome new toys from Fox, than he was moping up on the second or third floor of Wayne Manor doing NOTHING for years but hobbling around and shooting arrows.

I think Alfred secretly wanted Bruce for himself. He claims that Bruce never moved on and needs to find someone? How about fricking Alfred? How old is the guy? In his 70s? 80s? All he does is tidy up at Wayne Manor? Where's his dream girl? In Batman the Animated Series, atleast Alfred had his girl Maggie in that.

In fact, what kind of guy would turn down a dozen, hot russian ballerinas on a boat? Why the hell would any dude in their right mind want to know the Russian words for "apply your own bloody sun tan lotion"? Huh?

In TDKR, Alfred is a poorly written, phony control freak just like Bernard and possibly, uhh, infatuated with their Master's sons.

However, after eight years of Bruce doing the opposite, of refusing to live (even if he didn't give up Batman overnight and was doing the fusion energy project up until 3 years prior to TDKR, he was likely hallow inside), he could not let it go on when Batman turned from a noble cause into a death wish. Not to mention it was in a time when Gotham appeared to have gotten better.

So being a hermit and taking up archery in your dad's pajamas and robes is "living", but busting out the Lambo, Batsuit, stalking Selina Kyle and going out adventuring is "a death wish"?

Alright I guess.

Does Alfred have selfish reasons for telling Bruce to not become Batman again? Yes, but they are rational. Bruce has a death wish, which pretty much comes to pass when he faces Bane, it is just that Bane does the stupid comic book villain thing of sparing the hero's life. Otherwise, Alfred was proven right and, surprise surprise, Bane was able to complete his diabolical plan anyway.

You see, just because Alfred seems to claim that "Bruce wants to die" doesn't make it 100% true.

The only instance where Bruce is like, "kill me" is after Bane crippled him and he can't move on a prison bed in the middle of no where. Before that? He's getting back into Bruce Wayne/Batman mode. He's out seeing how he can take care of that knee of his. He cleaned himself up and shaved. He's following this mysterious woman that took his pearls. He's putting on that great, suave, eccentric billionaire persona on, he's going to Fox like he used to, he's flying around in a new Bat-vehicle, he's back in the game in his suit, and most importantly, he's looking into Bane as a threat.

Sure, he's not the Batman he used to be and is underestimating Bane, but he underestimated the Joker too!

Instead of threatening and actually packing up his bags and leaving, he should have helped Bruce train to be the Batman he once was. All that talk of giving the police the means to fight crime was nonsense. Alfred knew that Bane and "da League" were a pretty big deal the way he was hyping them up after his Google searches on the batcomputer, he knew Bruce was the only one capable of stopping them, and HE WAS!

So what's he do, he tries to tear Batman down. Imagine what they might have accomplished if he had stuck by his side. I doubt there'd be a 5 month siege. To put it simply, Alfred isn't the character that we knew from the first two films. But then again, save for Fox, that's true of most of the characters in TDKR unfortunately.

Yes, Alfred leaves and tells Bruce the truth, but only because he is hoping to save Bruce's life. He kept the letter secret to spare Bruce pain, but he sees that it has rotted away at him to the point where he is ready to die. Of course, Alfred will not spill the truth, thereby (seemingly) dissolving their friendship, unless it became a life or death situation, which it did.

Yeah, so?

We know what Alfred's reasons are, that doesn't mean it's good. It's only there to literally strip everything away from Bruce. That's the only reason. That's what the film does, it deconstructs the character in a crappy way.

- You like Bruce Wayne and Batman? Boy are you in for a big surprise with the first hour

- Bruce is a bearded, worthless, crippled hermit character that should die

- Wayne Enterprises? ON THE VERGE OF GOING UNDER

- You like Alfred? Forget it, he's leaving Bruce.

- Batman? PWNED

- Gordon, bloated and useless, sends all of the cops into a trap

- All of Batman's arsenal? That's going straight to the villains this time!



I'm actually surprised they didn't burn down Wayne Manor for a second time to be honest. Hell, they already destroyed the batsignal and Batmobile, they should have went all out and murdered Alfred too.

As for setting him up with "villains," have you never seen friends try to help a widow/widower/divorcee or whatever get back out in the world. And choosing the beautiful and friendly colleague as a rebound is not exactly the same as saying go to the nearest biker bar to get started.

I'd take the nearest biker bar instead of a criminal that's been in prison and connived her way up stairs and stole your deceased employee's pearls that has quite the criminal record. It's pretty much stated out right that Alfred would set Bruce up with anyone at that point, which is odd to say the least if he cares about his well being. I wonder how he'd feel if he found out who Miranda Tate actually was?

I get the idea of moving on, I get that Alfred doesn't want to see Bruce in pain or die, but the way this movie/story handles it is completely absurd. It's ridiculous.


There's some good ideas in there, just like Spider-Man 3, but for me, and others, it just falls apart and feels ridiculous.

 

[The Joker]

The award for best post goes to milost.

 

[DACrowe]

Yup.

Spider-Man 3 and TDKR have the same, lame "threequel" problems where the writers take the contrived story explanations route. "During film one, this happened", "now this character knows or felt this way", "this didn't happen, this happened".

The thing with Bernard is lame. He didn't even have much of a voice in the first two Spider-Man films (though he did show some concern in Spider-Man 2 I guess). But Alfred by TDKR is lame too. He holds that letter over Bruce's head for those long 8 years the same way Bernard held the fact that Norman killed himself. It's the same thing.

They both have the "threequel" writing problem of going back to film 1 and adding crap that wasn't even there. In Spider-Man, the first person to see Peter lay Norman on that sofa is Harry. Bernard isn't even in the scene. But yet, here comes Spider-Man 3 saying that "oh, Bernard cleaned Norman's wounds and had no doubt that the wound was self-inflicted. Same deal with Alfred. In Batman Begins, there isn't even the slightest hint that Alfred was hoping for Bruce to never come back and yet, here comes TDKR with "mastuh weyne, when you were gone dos 7 years, dos 7 years before batman begins, I bloody hoped that you lived a good life and vacationed to Florence Italy every year of those 7 years and to hope you had a wife and maybe some kids".


Yeah, I'm not sure which one is actually worse.

And he does move on . . . in The Dark Knight. Bruce isn't all doom and gloom, they're quipping about Batpods not being very subtle during the day, Batman is practically at his best saving the day, etc. etc.

But then sometime during the exposition filled 8 years he becomes a piece of crap, literally worthless and uninspiring. Yet Alfred NEVER tells him about the letter.








UNTIL . . .



Bruce starts to get back in the groove of things. He's fixing up his knee, he's investigating the pearls, looking for this Bane guy, visiting Gordon, visiting Fox, LIVING again. So what does Alfred do? He selfishly spills the beans and turns the tables on Bruce. Why? Because "he cares for him". That's bull. If that's the case, why not tell him sooner. Because he had a supposed death wish? He looked like he was fairing better in the Batsuit, shagging Miranda Tate, following the Catlady around and getting awesome new toys from Fox, than he was moping up on the second or third floor of Wayne Manor doing NOTHING for years but hobbling around and shooting arrows.

I think Alfred secretly wanted Bruce for himself. He claims that Bruce never moved on and needs to find someone? How about fricking Alfred? How old is the guy? In his 70s? 80s? All he does is tidy up at Wayne Manor? Where's his dream girl? In Batman the Animated Series, atleast Alfred had his girl Maggie in that.

In fact, what kind of guy would turn down a dozen, hot russian ballerinas on a boat? Why the hell would any dude in their right mind want to know the Russian words for "apply your own bloody sun tan lotion"? Huh?

In TDKR, Alfred is a poorly written, phony control freak just like Bernard and possibly, uhh, infatuated with their Master's sons.

Again, easily the most asinine argument I have seen on this board.

Because Alfred, after being given three films of development, chooses to act in Bruce's best interest, he is on par with a plot device in Spider-Man 3?



He chose not to reveal the truth to Bruce over 8 years, or more likely 3 years (as that is how long Bruce has been totally reclusive), because it would be the dissolution of their friendship. He did not want that, it was a selfish thing yes. But so was always siding with Bruce. He always had reservations, as would any sane and rational person, about Bruce's crusade. He even says in BB, "The only thing that stopped me from calling the men in white coats...," which showed a skepticism. In TDK, the city immediately needed a face to rally behind because first, the Joker was causing mayhem and panic, and then secondly Harvey Dent was blown half to hell. He knew Batman could be that symbol.

Eight years pass. Bruce's body deteriorates and he is not the man he used to be.

Your juvenile jokes aside, did you miss the part where Batman has his ass handed to him by Bane? Where his back is broken? Where Bane taunts him for asking to die with, "You don't fear death?" With the prison doctor telling him to discover a passion for life, and thereby a fear of death, to persevere? It's all there. Alfred was right that he went out with a death wish and almost got himself killed.

Did he think that way in TDK? No. But eight years of suffering changes dispositions when in the previous film, they were in a state of perpetual crisis.

So being a hermit and taking up archery in your dad's pajamas and robes is "living", but busting out the Lambo, Batsuit, stalking Selina Kyle and going out adventuring is "a death wish"?

Alright I guess.

Getting your back broken because you are getting sloppy and don't care certainly is. It is as if you are willfully ignoring what's in the film.

Yeah, so?

We know what Alfred's reasons are, that doesn't mean it's good. It's only there to literally strip everything away from Bruce. That's the only reason. That's what the film does, it deconstructs the character in a crappy way.

Says you. Alfred in Batman Begins: "The only reason I didn't call the men in white coats." Alfred in TDK, "Things have gotten better...why don't you hire them and take a day off." He was always skeptical. But people see what they want to see.

I'd take the nearest biker bar instead of a criminal that's been in prison and connived her way up stairs and stole your deceased employee's pearls that has quite the criminal record. It's pretty much stated out right that Alfred would set Bruce up with anyone at that point, which is odd to say the least if he cares about his well being. I wonder how he'd feel if he found out who Miranda Tate actually was?

I get the idea of moving on, I get that Alfred doesn't want to see Bruce in pain or die, but the way this movie/story handles it is completely absurd. It's ridiculous.

If you didn't get the gist of what Alfred was saying the scene allow me...

There's some good ideas in there, just like Spider-Man 3, but for me, and others, it just falls apart and feels ridiculous.

And there are others who also think Return of the King falls a part. It does not make them, or you, right.

 

[Green Goblin]

The villains were lame in SM3, the only lame villain in TDKR that might have been Tate.

 

[justpassinby]

Almost anything would have been more tedious and exposition heavy than him simply knowing, I can agree to that much.

Cost/benefit thing here.
"More tedious and exposition heavy" = better than ****ING LAUGHABLE.
Oh, and I've got a slight hunch that you don't actually have any problems with other scenes actually using exposition and common sense... like the Reese scene (hardly tedious or heavy, more like fast and elegant)... or anything else, point is that it's actually in the movie, rather than an alternative to a scene that you have to defend

And yea, nothing could've been as tedious... as replacing some bits in that 2 minute speech with some equally well delivered "so I start digging... observing..."

 

[justpassinby]

"He chose not to reveal the truth to Bruce over 8 years, or more likely 3 years (as that is how long Bruce has been totally reclusive), because it would be the dissolution of their friendship. He did not want that, it was a selfish thing yes. But so was always siding with Bruce."

But would they have had the same fallout, had he revealed the letter earlier? Maybe before he slipped into depression? Or not when he started to get back into the swing of things?
But then again, Bruce's ******** reaction was out-of-character, too, so what the heck - anything could've happened!

Also, remember how they didn't show the letter burned in TDK's closing montage? There was a sense of ambiguity about it... did he.... or did he not? Eh, disappointing pay-off.


Anyway, just attempting a short synthesis here:
You could make sense into everything that's going on with the two, heck most of it even DOES make sense, especially given how they've all changed in 8 years.
But that's really the problem with the movie, and all its elements that feel "wrong" to the critical camp here - it changed all this stuff behind your back, in order to set up something that wasn't as exciting as what seemed to almost write itself following naturally from Dark Knight.

That's it really... a thousand reasons why they're ooc, and a thousand reasons why they make sense / how they developed into what they are; but the former side ultimately wins, because the name of the game is developing a story and not inventing stuff that's jarring

Alfred could've motivated and trained Bruce the right way, try to work on his death wish maybe... oh wait he was physically crippled. And old. so old (with what, 40? How old was Bane? Meh)... again, off-screen. Just like that.
Alfred would've done just that before, but now he's also grown sad and old (for whatever reason), so he's acting differently - problem solved! And all the fun sucked out.


Lots of points one could go through, but yea, that's the gist of it I think?

 

[Snow Queen]

^^I'm not going to bother getting involved but Alfred did burn the letter:

[YT]GDQob4AOCsQ[/YT]

Skip to the Alfred bit. He lights the edges on fire and you can see flames moving up the letter.

 

[BatLobster]

Cost/benefit thing here.
"More tedious and exposition heavy" = better than ****ING LAUGHABLE.
Oh, and I've got a slight hunch that you don't actually have any problems with other scenes actually using exposition and common sense... like the Reese scene (hardly tedious or heavy, more like fast and elegant)... or anything else, point is that it's actually in the movie, rather than an alternative to a scene that you have to defend

And yea, nothing could've been as tedious... as replacing some bits in that 2 minute speech with some equally well delivered "so I start digging... observing..."

No, see...the point is, and I've said it over and over again, is that the people who are have problems with the scene are ASSUMING that Blake has no common sense. Assuming that he might not have put two and two together about how Bruce was gone for 7 years and showed up back in Gotham right around the first appearance of the Batman. Assuming that he wouldn't realize that Batman needed a lot of money to be able to do what he does. Assuming that a guy who proved himself to be a good detective in this film wouldn't have used some rationale to back up his hunch...like detectives do. To me these are counterintuitive assumptions to make. It seems unavoidable that is mind would reach all of those conclusions just based on the surface evidence.

So I didn't need to hear it. That's not what the scene was about. Could they have added a line or two like that? Sure. But it wouldn't have made the scene better or worse for me, just added to its length.

And also, yes. Alfred burned the letter. There was never any question about it.

 

[scotland5finest]

t:t:t:

Well Atleast there wasn't any Bat nipples or close ups of private areas.

 

[scotland5finest]

I'll say this much at least the ending is somewhat on point to the whole Batman genre. Showing that there will be a Batman to continue to protect the city. To make the kids name Robin was just idiotic. What they should have done was never mentioned his name at all throughout the movie then at the end have that lady say "okay Mr Grayson" or be like "This was left for you Richard" then he would say "I prefer Dick" something like that would have been cool.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

After the lukewarm reception of Man of Steel, they will wait longer before backlashing on Nolan's made universe

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

I'll say this much at least the ending is somewhat on point to the whole Batman genre. Showing that there will be a Batman to continue to protect the city. To make the kids name Robin was just idiotic. What they should have done was never mentioned his name at all throughout the movie then at the end have that lady say "okay Mr Grayson" or be like "This was left for you Richard" then he would say "I prefer Dick" something like that would have been cool.

That would have meant nothing to the audience unless he was dressed in a Robin costume.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Doesn't she have the advantage of being lighter in weight?

No. A child has multiple disadvantages. First off, they're just smaller. A full grown person can much more easily make a longer jump because of the simple fact that their legs are longer. Secondly, an adult has much more muscle, which leads to more power to really jettison yourself across a distance. Look at athletes who are great jumpers. They're usually heavy with muscle, because they need that muscle to generate good jumping power.

So there's no way a little kid who's grown up in a pit would be able to make a jump that full grown men couldn't.

Exactly.

Almost anything would have been better than "I recognized that look on your face"

Yep. I would have been fine with the "I recognized that look on your face" being part of the reason he found out who Bruce was, but not that alone. It just didn't ring true to me.