Discussion in 'The Dark Knight Rises' started by DeGenerate10, Nov 11, 2012.
He does the exact same thing than what he dislikes in others.
The most logical direction that should have been followed from TDK was not followed.
Even Gordon says "we'll hunt him...because he can take it" at the end, which in no way indicated that Batman would hang the cape and cowl for 8 years.
And the problem is, you never really feel that 8 years passed in the film - the idea just isn't executed well. TDKR's biggest weakness, really, is the demarcation between what we got, and what could have been. It's a problem with many sequels, especially with third installments.
Show us the proof before ya try and stir the pot.
Yup nail on the head.
Rises never felt like a natural sequel.
Neither did TDK, which focused heavily on other characters instead of the main guy. Contrast that with BB, which focused almost entirely on the main guy. Very different approach.
TDKR isn't meant to just be a sequel to TDK. As a trilogy closer it had to be a sequel to BB AND TDK. And as redfirebird2008 just said, those two were radically different films.
Considering that, I thought TDKR found a nice balance in style and narrative between the two, while blazing its own path.
It still focused on the main guy. They just didn't have a bloated origin story to go through with him. It was all about repercussions of Batman on Gotham. They continued with the stuff Begins set up. Escalation, the mob, the Joker card guy, a new D.A. to replace the one who was killed, a new mob guy filling in for Falcone, Rachel's word to Bruce about 'em being together one day and so on so on.
Felt like a true sequel in every way. The best.
It didn't feel like a sequel to Begins either since it made up a bunch of stuff we never heard of in Begins and changed the LOS completely.
Leaving our well documented disagreement on this issue aside ....
It still followed up on a lot of things from Begins. Bringing things like the Batcave and Wayne Manor back. Mentioning Bruce's parents, hell even Fredericks came back. Paying off the "why do we fall" theme. Paying off Gordon being Bruce's hero. Return of the rich/poor themes. Etc. etc.
Superficial things. Bringing back Wayne Manor, Fredericks, mentioning parents. Big whoop. That's like saying it felt like a sequel to TDK just cos the Bat-Pod, the Mayor and the Bat-bunker was brought back, too.
For me, you could tell a lot of time had passed in Gotham since the TDK in the first act. The burden of the lie was all over Bruce and Gordon's faces in the beginning.
Now the elapsed time during Bane's 5 month siege was kind of sketchy.
Exactly. It took more plot threads seen in Begins and developed on them further. The best kind of sequels do that, IMO.
Well to me little touches like that do make the movies feel connected. You bring back some of the furniture from previous movies and it makes it all feel like it's in the same world.
I liked seeing Fredericks, Mayor Garcia, the Bat-Bunker etc back again. Brief as they were, it was good. Heck I even loved seeing Senator Patrick Leahy there for another cameo. He could still be playing the same character, too, because for all we know he was the same W.E. guy at the party Bruce threw for Dent.
Meh bringing back a few props and faces didn't change that the story felt like it was some alien entry to the series.
After watching the trilogy all on Blu-ray last night and during today, here is my update....
I took it the same way. Bruce threw Dent a fundraiser with a bunch of his "pals", so it would make sense that Leahy was a board member, heh.
To me, it was more than just plot furniture that connected this movie to Begins though. You have stuff like the pit being one huge visual metaphor for the well Bruce fell down as a boy.
Though things like Wayne Manor and the mentioning of his parents weren't superficial to me at all. They have huge resonance in the story. Their absence felt deliberate in TDK too, because Bruce was so focused on his mission and it gave everything a sense of urgency. The return of these things felt just as deliberate in TDKR, to get back to the romanticism of BB. Little details like seeing the burnt photos of the Waynes go a long way in terms of adding dimension and uniting the three films. TDK didn't touch on the legacy of the Wayne family at all, but TDKR paid that off at the end with Bruce turning Wayne Manor into an orphanage.
TDKR definitely picked up a lot of threads from Begins that weren't superficial.
I think some people are struggling with the fact that Nolan had a different approach for ALL THREE films:
Film 1: Conventional superhero origin story intentionally modeled in part after Superman: The Movie with traditional plotting. Focus on three act story of the hero's journey a la Campbell.
Film 2: Multi-faceted ensemble piece that turns superhero conventions into a wider crime drama. Focuses are on how fantastic characters (Batman and Joker) cause semi-realistic institutions of modern day cities/societies to react, persevere and grumble including the DA, law enforcement, news media, political leadership, organized criminal elements, etc.
Film 3: A Dickensian epic about how a comic book extreme character (Bane) could cause a city/society to crumble in the wake of a revolution the likes of which we've seen in history and in current third worlds and how it effects the central protagonist of the last two films (Batman) on his journey to inner-peace. It is about class war, populism and moving beyond the arbitrary hero's journey.
None of them have the same approach. Therefore none of them feel the same.
Now this I actually agree with. TDKR was a great ending for Nolan's vision. However, I do think it feel a bit arbitrary as their is a lot of skipped story potential between TDK and TDKR. There could have been 1-2 more films just set up about how we get from the end of TDK to the beginning of TDKR. It seems more that Nolan wanted to end with three, understandably so, and kind of jumped ahead to the finale.
But why? You may have desired more, but there's no other Rogues present or necessary enough to justify his existence during that time. The only reason he comes back in TDKR is because of some underground masked brute he hears about.
Outside of Penguin or Riddler, who IMO, aren't strong enough threats on the level of Ras, The Joker or Bane, who else was going to show up? Who else would be that threatening? And more importantly, who else would be threatening on the level of the previous three villains, and still work within Nolan's vision?
Indeed. One reason why I love the trilogy. Each movie individually bends genres and the trilogy itself bends genres form film to film.
As far as the 4 film thing goes...well, that is just the nature of the beast when you're talking about boiling down an iconic comic book superhero into one story spanning 3 films. There's going to be stuff left out and unexplored potential. Emotionally, the jump from TDK to TDKR makes sense to me. Joker talks about how Batman will be "cast out" in TDK, foreshadowing the ending. And that's really how we find Bruce in TDKR, totally cut off from society.
To be honest, after I saw TDK I was a bit worried that the third film (if it got made) would have to go through the motions and have Batman hunted by the police, eventually redeemed and everything would be topped off with the bat-signal getting restored. Now, these things did happen in TDKR but none of them in a way I was expecting and I appreciated that. A movie where the focus was on Batman being hunted never really seemed like the most interesting option to me. I think that would have been a drag honestly, because it's just way too obvious that Batman's reputation would have to be restored by the end. TDKR dealt with that whole aspect in a way where it's there, but it's not the primary focus.
BLR, I myself was worried about a direction for Film 3 when I saw Two-Face pop up in TDK. I went in expected the old plan for Two-Face in part 3. I was never enthusiastic about treatments with Riddler, Penguin or the miscellaneous other rogues frequently mentioned.
To start with, the whole 8-year gap is fine, but I would've made Batman fade from public sighting gradually over the years rather than just abruptly make him disappear. Bruce Wayne would've been a hermit, sure, but in the sense that he has become 'lost inside his monster'. He has isolated himself from the world as Bruce Wayne but not as Batman. He still would go out every other night after Dent's murder being on the run from the police but not finding much crime on the streets as the Dent Act was working perhaps so well that slowly Bruce realizes that he isn't needed out on the streets anymore. Suddenly he has lost all sense of purpose. True to what Rachel said in TDK about "the day would never come when Bruce no longer needs Batman" even Gotham doesn't anymore. He just sulks around the cave hoping for a reason to put on the suit again. This would've tied very well with Alfred's speech about Bruce never moving on and simply waiting for things to go bad.
Secondly, it would've been so much better had they not completely undermined TDK's ending by exposing the Dent coverup. In TDK, Batman and Gordon make a questionable but perfectly justifiable decision for the greater good, and in my opinion was the right thing to do. It was morally ambiguous, but TDKR undercuts it by showing that it was the wrong choice, which takes the ambiguity a step back to the simpler black-white scale. So my version of the script would've kept the truth about Dent concealed. Of course, it would still be killing Gordon on the inside praising Dent as a martyr, but making that conflict permanent as retribution for their lie would've made for better storytelling by showing that Gordon, like Batman, was also paying the price for it.
Now, Bane. Building on the fact that he and his men "were behind the coup in West Africa", Bane would be a genuine extremist revolutionary along the lines of Che Guevara rather than simply wanting to 'destroy Gotham'. Throughout his childhood, Bane himself witnessed the excesses of capitalism sucking the lifeblood out of developing impoverished nations and his crusade against the Western economic imperialists gains him his own group of mercenaries, fanatical followers and resources. Of course, Bane would be ex-LOS who was cast out by Ra's because Bane's methods were too radical as well as too ideologically different, and this would also be one of his motivations for attacking Gotham - to prove Ra's wrong and succeed where Ra's failed. His attack on the stockmarket would bankrupt not only Bruce Wayne, but also pension funds and many social security benefits instruments. This economic collapse would be the trigger for Bane to start his own French Revolution and recruit the common working man who lost everything to the greed of blue-blooded aristocrats. There is actual civil war and Gotham's citizens are given their fair share of screentime. This setup would've made the film much more relevant and resonant to our times just like TDK.
The whole pit prison subplot would essentially remain the same with a few notable changes. First of all, no Ra's flashback. That was just cheesy and unnecessary. The blind doctor, with the help of Bruce's cellmate, would actually do some sort of medical operation on Bruce's back to help his recovery. The mystery of the child who escaped the pit - unchanged. With his mask broken, Bane's crippling pain would be what ultimately kills him. In the climax of the final battle with Batman, Bane would lie there, paralyzed, defiantly refusing to be saved (because as I said, he would be someone who truly believed in his cause) and takes his last breath with words of respect towards his able adversary.
I'd also axe the pointless city orphans subplot and give more screentime to Selina Kyle/Catwoman and Miranda Tate/Talia. Speaking of Talia, she would be this supremely talented infiltrator who had infiltrated both Bane's mercenaries and Wayne Enterprises. Bane would think her on his side, as would Bruce, but in truth she would be working under both their noses to fulfill her father's (and the now scattered and defeated League Of Shadows') destiny. She would also be the one who kills Fox (you really need an important death to raise the emotional stakes) and Batman, thinking it was Bane, let's out all his fury at him in the final battle.
Now, since there is civil war in Gotham, the federal government would want to step in and take control of the situation. However, Bane's deterrent this time around would not be a fusion nuclear bomb (screw the entire clean energy project subplot), but rather a biological weapon - a virus or plague of some sort developed by Dr. Pavell. Bane threatens that if anyone interferes with the revolution, he has infected an unknown number of his people with the virus who would spread the plague throughout the country. Ergo, the U.S government orders a full-on quarantine of Gotham. Boom, you get your No Man's Land scenario and a believable reason for how the army and national guard would not let anyone in or out of Gotham.
Gordon, Blake, the honest cops and some of Gothams upright citizens are trying to maintain order are fighting a losing battle against the revolutionaries and are running out of both time and resources. Before dying, Fox completes working on a cure for the plague and a way to disperse it in the atmosphere. And the mobile core would be the instrument to do so. The cure would need to be ignited at extremely high temperatures to make it airborne a.k.a why The Bat needs to drag it to the skies for your big explosion in the end. After backstabbing Batman, Talia finds out about the mobile core cure for the plague and plans to sabotage it with the help of her loyal LOS members who also had infiltrated Bane's mercenary group. Gordon drives the truck with the core in the back to keep it safe from Talia and her goons in the Tumblers who plan to destroy it and permanently plunging Gotham towards a self-destructive civil war.
In hindsight....I would have started work on a time machine before 2012 so I can go back to 2004 and relive the hype all over with the trilogy
I wouldn't change a thing from the trilogy. Each movie had a purpose and an impact into the life of Bruce/batman. There was an origin story that showed us how he became batman. A middle story that tested batmans detective skills and morality. A conclusion that forced Bruce to rethink about his existence in the world and an actual physical threat that could destroy him.
Although, I not sure whether Bane was born in the pit or if he was put in there as a child. I ask, because, when Bruce uses his device to shut all the lights, Bane says that while Bruce merely adapted to the darkness, he was born into it, not seeing the light until he was a man.
1) You can't get fingerprints off a shattered bullet. But, if Joker left a casing as a clue, that'd make more sense and would be something I'd change.
2) Have a better way for Blake to know who Batman is (not that I have a problem with him knowing, just don't like the explanation.
3) Reshoot Talia's death.
4) Use Jonathan's original script for TDKR, the 400 page version.
Im sorry but...it wouldn't. It's the other way around....
I edited that paragraph out of my original post. It sounds too obnoxious and self-important. Note to self: stay off the Hype when awake for 39 hours and have too much caffeine in my system.