• Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version.

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

Ive seen him do something like that before. I think criminals would start getting a bit suspicious of Batman, if theyre own weren't disappearing. Like the beginning of B89.

"I heard the Bat got Johnny Gobs".

That creates a darker image,especially when its most needed now.
 
I agree with whoever said it could possibly end with Bruce realizing he can't stop being Batman, but being at peace with that knowledge.
Maybe in the next film, the timeline could be about 2 to 3 years down the road, Batman has been so effective, crime is just about nil in Gotham. Between the crime being down, the the general public still holding a distaste for Batman because of the events of TDK, Bruce retires as Bats.
Enter a new foe or villian, such as the Riddler (I'm not campaigning for him just saying it has to be a MAJOR villian) and he has taken Gotham by surprise.
Bruce realizes he must again don the cape and cowl after about a two year hiatus.
Bats goes to battle, thoroughly whoops the Riddler, and is vindicated in the public eye, possibly by showing mercy and not killing the Riddler when he has the opportunity in a very public place.
Maybe end with Gordon and Bats on top of the police station, as Gordon is installing a new batsignal. Gordon goes the whole, "We are getting too old for this" routine, and Bruce, for the first time ever in his Batman personna, shows some humanity and says, "Eventually, this city will kill us both. Let's hope some of the new generation feels the same way about Gotham that we do."
The camera pans out over the city, to the edge of town, where a circus is setting up its tents. On the side of the largest tent, it says, "THE FLYING GRAYSONS IN THEIR FAREWELL PERFORMANCE"
Roll Credits.
 
Last edited:
I picture Nolan's "ending" simply being the end of the beginning. When Nolan's done, and moves on, I imagine Batman will have become the somewhat-accepted vigilante that we all know and love.
 
No. A three film arc of Batman and and Bruce shouldn't have a last image relating to a completely different character. Nolan has specifically said that Robin is "still in a crib somewhere." I just can't see Robin fitting in with Nolan's Batman at all.
 
No. A three film arc of Batman and and Bruce shouldn't have a last image relating to a completely different character. Nolan has specifically said that Robin is "still in a crib somewhere." I just can't see Robin fitting in with Nolan's Batman at all.

Just an idea for an ending credits shot. Not saying introduce him on screen in any way.
 
No. A three film arc of Batman and and Bruce shouldn't have a last image relating to a completely different character. Nolan has specifically said that Robin is "still in a crib somewhere." I just can't see Robin fitting in with Nolan's Batman at all.

Exactly.
 
The natural ending of course is for Bruce to accept who he is and for the series to end with him reaffirming his place as Gotham's protector.

One thing I would love to see (but could never get made in a million years) is a movie version of Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader? starring Adam West, Michael Keaton, Kevin Conroy, Val Kilmer, George Clooney and Christian Bale as Batman. But yeah...it's fun to dream.
 
"Gotham needs a hero with a face."

B3 should end with the true heroes of Gotham, the heroes with a face, being established. Who were technically assumed these roles in Nolan's Batman films so far?

Batman Begins: Thomas Wayne - philanthropist, face of the people.
The Dark Knight: Harvey Dent - face of the law

It only makes sense, to me, that Bruce Wayne, after delving into the Batman persona more and more now that his "one hope for a normal life" in Rachel is gone, believing that there is no point in being Bruce Wayne anymore, comes to realise just how important Bruce Wayne is to Gotham, even more important than Batman, and he takes up the role his father assumed ("I'm going to rebuild it just the way it was, brick for brick").

And Jim Gordon, obviously, establishes himself as someone who can get the job done within the boundaries of the law, like Harvey Dent, giving the people hope in the judicial system.

As for Batman, I'm fairly sure he wont be the guy that Gotham comes to accept as their true hero, since Bruce Wayne and Jim Gordon will be that for Gotham. I honestly have no idea for what role Batman could play, but I can assume it's going to be a smaller role in the end.
 
The natural ending of course is for Bruce to accept who he is and for the series to end with him reaffirming his place as Gotham's protector.

One thing I would love to see (but could never get made in a million years) is a movie version of Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader? starring Adam West, Michael Keaton, Kevin Conroy, Val Kilmer, George Clooney and Christian Bale as Batman. But yeah...it's fun to dream.
I didnt like that story. I didnt understand what the hell was going on, what was the point, etc.
 
I didnt like that story. I didnt understand what the hell was going on, what was the point, etc.
It's a big tribute to the entire history of Batman. Showing that there are many versions of the character, but the one thing they all have in common is that they'll never give up. So when whenever one version "dies," there will be a new Batman, a resurrection of sorts, but it'll still be the same guy deep down.
 
But those stories were nuts! Alfred was claiming that he was the Joker and all that jazz.... But, I guess you re right.

Personally as far as crazy stories are concerned, i'd like to see the Return of Bruce Wayne.
 
"Gotham needs a hero with a face."

B3 should end with the true heroes of Gotham, the heroes with a face, being established. Who were technically assumed these roles in Nolan's Batman films so far?

Batman Begins: Thomas Wayne - philanthropist, face of the people.
The Dark Knight: Harvey Dent - face of the law

It only makes sense, to me, that Bruce Wayne, after delving into the Batman persona more and more now that his "one hope for a normal life" in Rachel is gone, believing that there is no point in being Bruce Wayne anymore, comes to realise just how important Bruce Wayne is to Gotham, even more important than Batman, and he takes up the role his father assumed ("I'm going to rebuild it just the way it was, brick for brick").

And Jim Gordon, obviously, establishes himself as someone who can get the job done within the boundaries of the law, like Harvey Dent, giving the people hope in the judicial system.

As for Batman, I'm fairly sure he wont be the guy that Gotham comes to accept as their true hero, since Bruce Wayne and Jim Gordon will be that for Gotham. I honestly have no idea for what role Batman could play, but I can assume it's going to be a smaller role in the end.

I like where you are going with this but its obvious what role Batman would play. In the end Bruce and Batman are one and the same as Bruce will come to terms with this. Of course the people of Gotham will never know this but its indeed the case.

Batman will forever be the guardian protector of Gotham. Its a thankless job but its the job he has accepted and its what will drive him for the rest of his life.
 
Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader was a total mind**** to me. I dan read it over and over,but I STILL cant see the sense in it.
 
"Gotham needs a hero with a face."

B3 should end with the true heroes of Gotham, the heroes with a face, being established. Who were technically assumed these roles in Nolan's Batman films so far?

Batman Begins: Thomas Wayne - philanthropist, face of the people.
The Dark Knight: Harvey Dent - face of the law

It only makes sense, to me, that Bruce Wayne, after delving into the Batman persona more and more now that his "one hope for a normal life" in Rachel is gone, believing that there is no point in being Bruce Wayne anymore, comes to realise just how important Bruce Wayne is to Gotham, even more important than Batman, and he takes up the role his father assumed ("I'm going to rebuild it just the way it was, brick for brick").

And Jim Gordon, obviously, establishes himself as someone who can get the job done within the boundaries of the law, like Harvey Dent, giving the people hope in the judicial system.

As for Batman, I'm fairly sure he wont be the guy that Gotham comes to accept as their true hero, since Bruce Wayne and Jim Gordon will be that for Gotham. I honestly have no idea for what role Batman could play, but I can assume it's going to be a smaller role in the end.

I like this. But I think Batman's role will be just as important as Bruce for the city. I especially like your idea of Gordon acting in Dent's place as someone who can in fact work within the bounderies of the law. It shows that not all hope it lost. It's not Dent, but it's something that will do.
 
But those stories were nuts! Alfred was claiming that he was the Joker and all that jazz.... But, I guess you re right.

Personally as far as crazy stories are concerned, i'd like to see the Return of Bruce Wayne.

The first part was pretty whacked out and I'd change some of it, but Part 2 was beautiful.
 
Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader? was probably the most bizarre mind**** I have ever read in a Batman comic.
 
I like where you are going with this but its obvious what role Batman would play. In the end Bruce and Batman are one and the same as Bruce will come to terms with this. Of course the people of Gotham will never know this but its indeed the case.

Batman will forever be the guardian protector of Gotham. Its a thankless job but its the job he has accepted and its what will drive him for the rest of his life.

Yeah, I think I worded that last paragraph wrong. Bruce Wayne is important, but Bruce cannot escape the fact that he cannot stop being Batman, because Batman is apart of himself and will continue to watch over Gotham. But I was actually thinking more in terms of capacity. If Bruce and Gordon assume these roles, then does Batman need to go out every night, or at least in very high capacity?
 
I think so. I think Bruce feels he should. He can't fight criminals as Bruce Wayne or do much in that area. As Bruce he can be a philanthrapist and businessman. Being Batman also kind of serves him to do things he cannot do as Bruce. Like throwing Maroni off the building. It fits into Batman doing things we shake our head at and is not always the most noble thing to do but we love it. He can do both. If he was always Bruce he would be more angry. Batman could just make him blow off some steam. He is troubled, but he chooses to control it and uses Batman as therapy in ways. Not completely though. Bruce is not insane. Let's make that clear.
 
Bruce isnt insane. He's a noble badass.

The main thing in these movies is about Batman's symbol,the image he projects onto Gotham. He is first a dangerous nuisance,an unwelcome vigilante. Then,an unofficial crimefighter,to a hated nuisance,then a murderer.

After initial struggle to be accepted, Bruce sadly sees himself as what Gotham needs him to be,a killer. Thats not what he wanted,but has no other choice,and accepts it.

I see Bruce recreating his image,to fill in Harvey's shoes,and that might be half down to a naive attempt for him to quit as Batman.

Only a few characters see him as something more than a simple hero. This whole Harvey event might seriously affect how he sees himself,and those who do see him as a saviour need to remind him of what Batman truly is.
 
Only a few characters see him as something more than a simple hero. This whole Harvey event might seriously affect how he sees himself,and those who do see him as a saviour need to remind him of what Batman truly is.

I never thought of it like that but it makes sense. Bruce will realize that Batman must become, to some extent, what Harvey was to Gotham: A Knight in shining armor.

Of course Batman, by the very nature of his beginning in Gotham, will be the "dark" to Harvey's White Knight image.

Could it be that Batman wasn't, at least from the public's perception, this "Dark" Knight persona neither the 1st or 2nd movies but will demonstrate this new role in the 3rd?
 
Exactly.:up:

The 3rd will most definitely show his role as The Dark Knight,and that is obviously going to be a more extreme Batman. Like Harvey,going to extreme lengths as Gotham's White Knight.

The City accepted Harvey as their White Knight,their saviour. Now he's gone,to them, through Batman. But what Gotham dont see is what Gordon and Alfred see in him,that he is their biggest saviour. Even Harvey saw it himself. Harvey believed Batman was Gotham's 1 true hope,and Bruce believed Harvey was.

I do see him becoming more of a philanthropist to try and get out of it.

But Bruce is going to have to accept the truth of what his friends believe about him,that the true Batman is essential not only to Gotham,but to himself.
 
But Bruce is going to have to accept the truth of what his friends believe about him,that the true Batman is essential not only to Gotham,but to himself.

Bingo!!

So the next movie will be called "Batman Forever"...uh wait :huh:
 
I mean the movie COULD be about him refusing to believe and accept he is Gothams true hero,like Harvey was.

Then by the end the truth COULD come out through whatever means,and Batman is cleared,and all his heroic acts throughout could pay off for him.

In the end feeling he has failed,as all the criminals Harvey put away are released and his reputation slandered. But Gordon reassures him Harvey wouldn't have it any other way,as he believed in Batman more than himself and now Gotham does. All the criminals Harvey put away,Gordon tells Batman they will both put them right back where they belong. So it ends on a bittersweet,but triumphant note.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"