The Dark Knight Rises How should Nolan End Batman's Story?

[raybia]

Uh...what?

Sorry, I'm agreeing with you that the idea of killing Batman is stupid.

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

I cannot speak for anyone else, but here is why I am not apposed to the idea. The three movies are just Nolan's take on the character. This wouldn't be the END of the Batman character or the franchise, just how Nolan would see his movie Batman's story end. If this is Nolan's vision for the movie, it might turn out really good. Then after that Batman would get a new franchise of films. Even if Batman didn't die, I wouldn't want someone to take over after Nolan and continue the films in his style. I would hope to see a different take.
His sacragise at the end would be meaningful, so it wouldn't be like he died for no reason, It would be like [BLACKOUT]Bravehheart[/BLACKOUT].

So if Nolan's idea for how to end HIS story, his Batman, is to kill him off thats ok because we still have all the comics, the cartoon, and the next run of Batman films.
Plus it would be the first time that we would get to see a director take a character like Batman/Spider-Man/Superman and take him from his beginning to his end and clearly end the story there.

sorry....but HELL NO!!!!!!

regardless that it's Nolan's story or not, it's still a ridiculous idea regardless how you cut it and should NEVER be entertained....EVER

 

[Brother Jack]

If he retired, that pretty much defeats the whole purpose of what Bruce went through in The Dark Knight. He threw himself further into the hole when he accepted Dent's crimes. In Batman 3, and I think in some aspects, TDK, Batman realized that this is a life long project for him. He may think he's stuck with it, because of Rachel's death and Harvey's downfall/death. But the third should be about him accepting his role as Batman. It will go on forever. It's kind of a shame, if Batman Forever didn't have the title, Batman 3 would have been a perfect fit. Joker said it best. There is no going back.

Exactly. Even if he wanted to give up he no longer has anything to go back to; Batman is all he has. This is why I never understood the dislike about Bruce wanting to retire in TDK. Having the desire to retire is not the same as actually doing it, and the entirety of TDK is a showcase of how naive and wrong Bruce was (a definition of the limits Bruce didn't think Batman had). Does anyone really want a static protagonist who never changes? One of Batman's best features is that he's very human and fallible.

What I think the third film needs to do is to bring Bruce to a place where he realizes HE needs Batman just as much as the city does (effectively what Rachel told him in her going-away letter), and that his role in Gotham will probably never end. His rookie naivety should go as he comes into what he call "standard Batman".

 

[batman11]

What I think the third film needs to do is to bring Bruce to a place where he realizes HE needs Batman just as much as the city does (effectively what Rachel told him in her going-away letter), and that his role in Gotham will probably never end. His rookie naivety should go as he comes into what he call "standard Batman".

Exactly. I'm sure Nolan will expand on this. We get the great bit in the letter about how Rachel knows that there won't be a day where Bruce doesn't need Batman, yet there's never really a chance for Bruce to learn of this as the letter is burned. I wanna see Bruce come to terms with this in B3. He has, however, already done so, to an extent. The seeds are quite obviously planted at the end of TDK. It's all there. Bruce's lines, decision, escape, etc. Now it's time for expansion.

 

[raybia]

Exactly. I'm sure Nolan will expand on this. We get the great bit in the letter about how Rachel knows that there won't be a day where Bruce doesn't need Batman, yet there's never really a chance for Bruce to learn of this as the letter is burned. I wanna see Bruce come to terms with this in B3. He has, however, already done so, to an extent. The seeds are quite obviously planted at the end of TDK. It's all there. Bruce's lines, decision, escape, etc. Now it's time for expansion.

Exactly. I think the logical conclusion of Nolan's tale is that Bruce and Batman will become one and the same.

 

[Artistsean]

Exactly. I'm sure Nolan will expand on this. We get the great bit in the letter about how Rachel knows that there won't be a day where Bruce doesn't need Batman, yet there's never really a chance for Bruce to learn of this as the letter is burned. I wanna see Bruce come to terms with this in B3. He has, however, already done so, to an extent. The seeds are quite obviously planted at the end of TDK. It's all there. Bruce's lines, decision, escape, etc. Now it's time for expansion.

Its been a while since I saw it, what exactly happens in the end? I remember it, but not in detail.
You could put it in spoilers if you want.

I think the events of the Dark Knight, the Joker/Rachel/Dent added to his parents deaths already, could plunge Bruce into darkness.

OK here is my full idea,

Spoiler

Bruce (because of the Dark Knight events) is plunged into darkness and keeps falling. He has become darker, more aggressive, more withdrawn, more angry. He spends less time as Bruce and more time as Batman, but he now resents Batman. He is a little more brutal with his actions, against crime. (He also deals with the worst of the worst criminals and sees the goriest of crime scenes too but has no one to talk to about it.)
He talks to Alfred less and less, and with the completion of the Batcave, barely comes upstairs to the mansion anymore. His dealings with Fox have become few and all business. He doesn't talk with Gordon anymore. He has no one.
He feels tied down by his mission, a mission he cannot get out of. (like that scene in Mask of the Phantasm where is tries to get out of the mission by talking to his parents graves.)
While he is being Batman the hole left in the crime world, by the events of the Dark Knight, becomes a sort of war to fill it with the new crime bosses. Panguin could be one (representing the slow shift from regular criminals to the Joker Freaks), the Riddler could represent the newest Joker level threat (and the new class of Freak criminals like the Joker),
Riddler is a narcissistic psycho who taunts the police and Batman with clues and riddles.
Catwoman shows up too, she is a burglar who almost mockingly dresses like a cat (like Batman dresses like a bat). At first she is a dangerous flirtation. she doesn't want to hurt anyone, just loves the excitement of the crime. Batman knows he should catch her and turn her in or at least stay away, but he doesn't. She eventually becomes a more serious love interest of Batman. And helps him save the city, and helps his family (Alfred, Gordon, Fox) save Bruce. Her role would be similar to the Catwoman from Hush or the Nail, where she is an untrustworthy character, but becomes one of the few characters Bruce can trust. And proves herself to be not only an allie but a love interest.
I'd also throw in Bruce's childhood therapist Dr. Thompkins (from the cartoon) maybe.

How would the Riddler fit into Bruce's fall into Darkness? I don't know.

These are just ideas, but the main idea is that Bruce is now alone and is isolating himself even further. He is falling into the darkness that could send him over the edge. this movie would show Bruce reach the light at the end of the darkness, he will find solid ground in being Batman and be able to cope better.
Begins showed Bruce jump into this Batman idea.
Dark Knight showed the ramifications and tragedy that comes with being Batman.
the third and final Batman film could show Bruce come out of the darkness of tragedy a better Batman or something.

I never said Bruce should die, just that the death of a hero theme seemed to run through both Begins and Dark Knight. And it did start with the death of the Waynes forcing the city to save itself.

 

[thedrizzle59]

I understand why so many people are against the idea of Batman dying. But if Nolan does decide to kill him off in a beautiful way that adds pure emotion to the story to drive it to its final conclusion, would you all still be against it?

And for those who think that Nolan will end the movie with the notion that Batman will always have to fight for Gotham and that the fight will never be over, i have a couple of questions for you. Doesn't ending the story with this notion mean infinitely blowing the story up? Isn't this exactly what Nolan said he wasn't going to do?

And im sorry for calling people morons. I just hate being called wrong, even when i have evidence proving my point. thats all.

 

[mikey1974]

here's a thought...Bruce wayne dies....or people THINK he dies...

i like the idea of him helping the city,giving money for more police,starting charitable foundations to help the poor 9 who the mob are able to easily target) ,etc....

but suppose Bruce is shot and "killed" by the Joker or someone...Alfred doesn't take him to the hospital,but rather to the Cave and fixes him up himself... (this has happened many times in the comics,and i'm sure at the end of TDK,as he can't show up in the ER with a gunshot wound of the stomach)....

speculation runs rampant that he's dead,especially after his disappearance and the belief the mob made him "go away" ...this is the event that galvanizes the city to save itself again (shocking the rich and powerful into action) ,and Bruce sees that BRUCE WAYNE became the symbol that inspired the people of Gotham to save their city....so he allows the world to think of himself as being dead ...he already left everything to Alfred in his will (as told in BB) ,so the new mansion will be safe...Lucius gets ownership of Wayne enterprises... the money still gets funnelled to the charitable organizations...

and with Bruce "dead" , Wayne can BE The Batman,and continue his war on crime unimpeded by any obligations Bruce wayne had - indeed,he no longer has to worry about keeping up playboy appearances to throw people off...

and,there can be a throwaway line about him being "dead once before" ,to hint that if he decides to have Bruce ever return,there are ways to do it...

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

I understand why so many people are against the idea of Batman dying. But if Nolan does decide to kill him off in a beautiful way that adds pure emotion to the story to drive it to its final conclusion, would you all still be against it?

there is no way possible way to polish crap into gold, sorry

and that's exactly what that idea is, PURE CRAP!

 

[Gianakin_]

And im sorry for calling people morons. I just hate being called wrong, even when i have evidence proving my point. thats all.

You have no evidence. You are in the dark, like all of us. While I'm not 100% against Batman dying, there is no evidence right now to back it up.

 

[Two-Face]

Why the **** would you want Batman to die? You can't kill a iconic character just cos it looks different. If Nolan does not return for fourth then someone else should take over with their own vision not trying to copy Nolan's.

 

[Sharkboy]

I understand why so many people are against the idea of Batman dying. But if Nolan does decide to kill him off in a beautiful way that adds pure emotion to the story to drive it to its final conclusion, would you all still be against it?

And for those who think that Nolan will end the movie with the notion that Batman will always have to fight for Gotham and that the fight will never be over, i have a couple of questions for you. Doesn't ending the story with this notion mean infinitely blowing the story up? Isn't this exactly what Nolan said he wasn't going to do?

And im sorry for calling people morons. I just hate being called wrong, even when i have evidence proving my point. thats all.

Having an open ending, or "ending a film with a notion" as you say, can still give closure to a story. Of course in this day and age with endless sequels and reboots, it's easy to see why those types of endings would immediately be associated with "sequel tease!" A great example of an open ending which i thought gave great closure was in The Matrix, where you just assumed that since Neo was now the one and he would continue to free people and take down the matrix. Which is why the sequels were instantly cheapened for me.

Even with a respectable and emotional death, even if it was perfectly coherent in the themes and plot of Batman 3, I feel it would be too cheap and too easy to kill Batman off, and call it "closure" to the story arc. I would hope the Nolan brothers have a little more talent to give us a more subtle and satisfying end to their trilogy without resorting to such a cliche method. No matter how "beautifully" it is done.

 

[luke1234]

Having an open ending, or "ending a film with a notion" as you say, can still give closure to a story. Of course in this day and age with endless sequels and reboots, it's easy to see why those types of endings would immediately be associated with "sequel tease!" A great example of an open ending which i thought gave great closure was in The Matrix, where you just assumed that since Neo was now the one and he would continue to free people and take down the matrix. Which is why the sequels were instantly cheapened for me.

Even with a respectable and emotional death, even if it was perfectly coherent in the themes and plot of Batman 3, I feel it would be too cheap and too easy to kill Batman off, and call it "closure" to the story arc. I would hope the Nolan brothers have a little more talent to give us a more subtle and satisfying end to their trilogy without resorting to such a cliche method. No matter how "beautifully" it is done.

See I feel it's the opposite. I fully respect your opinion and get where a lot of people are coming from (yes even you Batman072), but personally I am at the point to give Nolan complete full reign on this character. He is a man of mystery and I think he and his brother are the only two writers that could pull off Batman's death without making it look like a cop-out. If poetically justified It could be one of the true tragedies that a main stream (not to mention superhero) movie could pull. A lot of people said if Wall-e died at the end of his movie it would of had more of a chance to win an oscar and would go down in history. Now Im not comparing these two movies but I am giving this notion that if its fits in the story, (which it would of have in Wall-e) it can be done.

Now is it going to happen? Honestly Probably not. We'll see though. I'm just excited to have a filmmaker that is not afraid to bring his full true vision to the cinemas.

 

[Sharkboy]

See I feel it's the opposite. I fully respect your opinion and get where a lot of people are coming from (yes even you Batman072), but personally I am at the point to give Nolan complete full reign on this character. He is a man of mystery and I think he and his brother are the only two writers that could pull off Batman's death without making it look like a cop-out. If poetically justified It could be one of the true tragedies that a main stream (not to mention superhero) movie could pull. A lot of people said if Wall-e died at the end of his movie it would of had more of a chance to win an oscar and would go down in history. Now Im not comparing these two movies but I am giving this notion that if its fits in the story, (which it would of have in Wall-e) it can be done.

Now is it going to happen? Honestly Probably not. We'll see though. I'm just excited to have a filmmaker that is not afraid to bring his full true vision to the cinemas.

Hey personally it would take alot of balls and alot of talent to make kill him off and not make it look cheap, and we know Nolan has both, so if it happens then good on him and good on us, but I cannot no matter how many great arguments there are for (and there have been alot of them) for the life of me, give my thumbs up to a Bruce Wayne death.

 

[luke1234]

Hey personally it would take alot of balls and alot of talent to make kill him off and not make it look cheap, and we know Nolan has both, so if it happens then good on him and good on us, but I cannot no matter how many great arguments there are for (and there have been alot of them) for the life of me, give my thumbs up to a Bruce Wayne death.

Hahah we'll keep it at that then

 

[not_a_victim]

I don't see Bats dying.
I see his redemption in the third film because of his "fall" in TDK. A story doesn't have to end with the death of the major character, it ends with resolving the conflict that character was facing.
I could see someone like the Riddler getting the upper hand on Bats, and possibly forcing him to unmask in public, and admit who he is. I don'tknow if that would stop Wayne from being Bats, or if he would simply go on being Bats...

 

[Sharkboy]

Hahah we'll keep it at that then

Hey but, if the taste is excellent, i'll eat whatever they serve.

 

[luke1234]

Hey but, if the taste is excellent, i'll eat whatever they serve.

word up

It's funny because were making all these prediciton and assumptions and we still have no idea of the title or the villains yet haha

one more month probably till we get some news.

 

[Two-Face]

It's funny now people want Batman to die, when I joined the Hype people were against Joker dying in Batman 89. Funny how times change eh?

 

[luke1234]

It's funny now people want Batman to die, when I joined the Hype people were against Joker dying in Batman 89. Funny how times change eh?

This is true.

 

[Gianakin_]

It's funny now people want Batman to die, when I joined the Hype people were against Joker dying in Batman 89. Funny how times change eh?

It's not the same. Not that I'm advocating that Bats should die.

 

[Two-Face]

How is it not the same? two are the most iconic characters in comic/movie history.

 

[Gianakin_]

How is it not the same? two are the most iconic characters in comic/movie history.

Yes, but you have to look at the context. Batman is the center of his world. The Joker is the antagonist. If Batman dies, we don't really care what happens next (and I'm talking about the movies here). If Joker dies, the next enemy comes along, he's just not as iconic.

 

[Two-Face]

That's because there is only hero here that's Batman. You can kill Joker there are other villains to explore If batman dies then Batman franchise will be finished or reboot the franchise but you can't kill Batman.

 

[Gianakin_]

That's because there is only hero here that's Batman. You can kill Joker there are other villains to explore If batman dies then Batman franchise will be finished or reboot the franchise but you can't kill Batman.

Exactly. That's why I'm saying that, while Joker dying in B89 and (allegedly) not returning for B3 is a big bummer, it's not the same as Bats dying, which would be the end of the Nolan's Batverse.