The Dark Knight Rises In hindsight what changes would you do

[Victarion]

I figured since Bane grew up in a savage environment, he'd want to protect Talia from experiencing the same thing he did. The worst case scenario in defending Talia was the release of death.

 

[BatLobster]

Why would a man who has spent his entire life underground and sees how prison life and other prisoners act (in a dog eat dog world where raping, murder and violence is rampant and okay), risk his life to save a little girl and think of her as "innocent" and protect her?

Shouldn't living underground harden him and make him that monster that Ra's sees in him?

You're asking the exact questions that make me enjoy Bane's characterization man, it's trippy haha. That's the whole point, despite the hell he's surrounded by Bane believes in the existence of innocence in the world and believes there are things worth saving. Why can't he be tough and hardened and have compassion for an innocent child at the same time? It's like Bruce when he lived among the criminals. The lifestyle hardened him but he "never became one of them."

 

[OutOfBoose]

Every scene and line in the film is executed poorly?

So the scene where Bruce meets Selina for the first time trying to steal his mothers pearls, that's executed poorly?

Batman's return scene, you mean to tell me that's a huge mess?

Yes, there are problems with the film, but saying the entire thing, from start to finish is a mess is beyond ridiculous.

I was saying that every scene and every line in the movie was discussed and analyzed. I didn't say that every scene and every line in the movie is bad.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Well, this entire thing originated out of,

The only one that has said "you can all have opinions but you shouldn't think this way" is you, milost.

Please tell me how these two are good, compelling villains? PLEASE. I need to see this maturity and respect for the characters and how they're better than previous incarnations.

Bane was a compelling villain to me. My favorite Batman villain done right in a film, imo, that hit certain marks of the character in the comics(even if some don't view it the same way). I even enjoyed the change of pace of him working alongside Talia as opposed to Talia hating Bane as in the comics because it fit with Nolan's goal of bringing back the LoS. Again, some do not, and you obviously don't, but to me, Bane was a very compelling villain that I ended up feeling sorry for in the end with how he cared for and protected Talia, his real life Osito.

Have I ever said Talia was compelling though? I don't think I have. In fact, I know I have listed Talia as my least enjoyable villain in Nolan's trilogy.

 

[milost]

The only one that has said "you can all have opinions but you shouldn't think this way" is you, milost.

Well, I don't know about you, but sometimes I feel like my opinions are being scorned and questioned as something "wrong" when I post. So forgive me if I sometimes come off as brash. I just try to counter act the vibes I'm getting from posts and views that are different from my own.

Bane was a compelling villain to me. My favorite Batman villain done right in a film, imo, that hit certain marks of the character in the comics(even if some don't view it the same way). I even enjoyed the change of pace of him working alongside Talia as opposed to Talia hating Bane as in the comics because it fit with Nolan's goal of bringing back the LoS. Again, some do not, and you obviously don't, but to me, Bane was a very compelling villain that I ended up feeling sorry for in the end with how he cared for and protected Talia, his real life Osito.

Have I ever said Talia was compelling though? I don't think I have. In fact, I know I have listed Talia as my least enjoyable villain in Nolan's trilogy.

Fair enough. You're entitled to feel that way. There is no right or wrong here, just opinions and feelings.

 

[RAINMAKER]

I will always view those two lines from Bane to be about his views on the innocence of children. If not, then the "lovely, lovely voice" statement as well the "For the sake of your children, Dr. Pavel" lines aren't even necessary and make too much sense because of how Bane cared for a young Talia to not connect the dots. You don't, then marvelous, but I certainly do. I've thought that way since the first time I saw TDKR.

I feel the "lovely voice" comment was him using humor. And the second comment didn't feel like he cared for Pavel's children. He was simply giving Dr. Pavel motivation to do what Bane said. I guess it comes down to how you interpret it. But don't you find it bizarre that if Bane does care for children, why would he want to blow up a city filled with children?

And during my discussions with Shikamaru, those men may not have even been LoS and instead Bane's men/mercenaries. Bane had the army, and Talia needed an army = Bane didn't just "come along"(if you go by that theory, and it's quite interesting).

That was my theory awhile ago and some posters and I discussed this. Again, I feel the "LOS' was a symbol, like Batman. Anybody can claim to be the LOS, just like those phonies were dressing up as "Batman". And while the Joker didn't know who the real Batman was, he knew Brian was a phonie.

With that said, from the first time I watched it in the theater, I thought that Talia and Bane's LOS was not Ra's's LOS. However, they may have some former members because how else would she have found out who killed her father?

But overall, I agree with you that most of their army is Bane's mercenaries.

 

[JackWhite]

I was saying that every scene and every line in the movie was discussed and analyzed. I didn't say that every scene and every line in the movie is bad.

Ah, fair enough.

 

[Brain Damage]

So, I was flipping through the Art of The Dark Knight Trilogy book in a store today and came upon this interesting passage.

"One idea that intrigued the writer/director as he considered a sequel was how he might interpret the Joker in the hyperrael world of Batman Begins, and how the Joker might act as the catalyst for Bruce Wayne's becoming more entrenched in his Batman mission. 'We'd laid down the idea in Batman Begins that Bruce Wayne's plan in becoming Batman was to do what he could do for a finite period of time,' said Nolan. 'He had something like a five-year plan, a set amount of time he would spend setting Gotham straight, and then he would go off and do something else with his life, because, like anybody else, he wanted a life other than one of vigilantism and subterfuge.'
To borrow from an old aphorism: Men make plans, and the Joker laughs.
'With the reveal of the joker card at the end of Batman Begins,' said Nolan, 'we created the sense that it wasn't going to be as simple as Bruce doing what he could for five years and then getting out."

Idk about the rest of you, but to me that reads like the eight-year retirement was not part of the original plan. And that disappoints me, because thought I did not hate that plot point, I would have much rather seen a movie where Bruce truly gets lost in his monster.

 

[Anno_Domini]

I feel the "lovely voice" comment was him using humor. And the second comment didn't feel like he cared for Pavel's children. He was simply giving Dr. Pavel motivation to do what Bane said. I guess it comes down to how you interpret it. But don't you find it bizarre that if Bane does care for children, why would he want to blow up a city filled with children?

Bane is the "necessary evil" that came to destroy a city with his partner(and yes, I will always believe them to be partners) Talia in destroying a city that Ra's al Ghul tried to(but this time, they weren't going to press the restart button on Gotham; they were just going to blow it all up to Hell), but even with being this "necessary evil", there's nothing wrong in showing your feelings and views on children since that calls back to Bane's time in the Pit when he protected a child from all of the other inmates.

That was my theory awhile ago and some posters and I discussed this. Again, I feel the "LOS' was a symbol, like Batman. Anybody can claim to be the LOS, just like those phonies were dressing up as "Batman". And while the Joker didn't know who the real Batman was, he knew Brian was a phonie.

With that said, from the first time I watched it in the theater, I thought that Talia and Bane's LOS was not Ra's's LOS. However, they may have some former members because how else would she have found out who killed her father?

But overall, I agree with you that most of their army is Bane's mercenaries.

I gotta say, for the longest I believed them to have been the League of Shadows, but I'm really getting the idea that Talia and Bane were the LoS, and those men? They were always Bane's men since their coup in Africa mentioned by Alfred and Talia just came into this plan and then it became, more or less, a "League of Shadows 2.0"(so it kinda reflects how I always called them the LoS 2.0 anyways, but now it's just they became that title after the partnership of Talia al Ghul and Bane).

 

[Anno_Domini]

So, I was flipping through the Art of The Dark Knight Trilogy book in a store today and came upon this interesting passage.

"One idea that intrigued the writer/director as he considered a sequel was how he might interpret the Joker in the hyperrael world of Batman Begins, and how the Joker might act as the catalyst for Bruce Wayne's becoming more entrenched in his Batman mission. 'We'd laid down the idea in Batman Begins that Bruce Wayne's plan in becoming Batman was to do what he could do for a finite period of time,' said Nolan. 'He had something like a five-year plan, a set amount of time he would spend setting Gotham straight, and then he would go off and do something else with his life, because, like anybody else, he wanted a life other than one of vigilantism and subterfuge.'
To borrow from an old aphorism: Men make plans, and the Joker laughs.
'With the reveal of the joker card at the end of Batman Begins,' said Nolan, 'we created the sense that it wasn't going to be as simple as Bruce doing what he could for five years and then getting out."

Idk about the rest of you, but to me that reads like the eight-year retirement was not part of the original plan. And that disappoints me, because thought I did not hate that plot point, I would have much rather seen a movie where Bruce truly gets lost in his monster.

Well to put this realistically, TDK's events weren't even the original plan. It all changed to fit with what was needed at the time of writing. With Ledger having passed and what they did with Dent at the end of TDK, Nolan view that eight year gap of retirement and finally letting Bruce move on worked for him. But, it's nice that they sort of still had an idea of having Bruce move on when he did clean up Gotham(albeit, with the mobs, it was the Dent Act).

 

[BatLobster]

I gotta say, for the longest I believed them to have been the League of Shadows, but I'm really getting the idea that Talia and Bane were the LoS, and those men? They were always Bane's men since their coup in Africa mentioned by Alfred and Talia just came into this plan and then it became, more or less, a "League of Shadows 2.0"(so it kinda reflects how I always called them the LoS 2.0 anyways, but now it's just they became that title after the partnership of Talia al Ghul and Bane).

I'm leaning more that way myself these days. I figure Barsad for example had to be working with Bane before he ever had his alliance with Talia. You can tell he's just super loyal to Bane. Not to mention the extra recruits they got from within Gotham both before and after the siege.

The LOS 2.0 is like one huge whirlwind of mercenaries and revolutionaries who wanted to do something huge for a higher purpose.

 

[Anno_Domini]

Indeed. And some may say Talia was the big boss because Barsad left with her in the end...the main goal, Talia or Bane, was the bomb, and Bane's men knew from the start they act as sacrificial lambs so when Talia had to secure the bomb, Barsad knew he had to be the guns for Talia since she didn't show any experience of the sort(which is sad since Nolan didn't use Talia al Ghul to her potential, but I digress) and Barsad leaving Bane was just to continue the plan. Bane is an adult after all, so I never got the idea that Talia is the boss just because Barsad left with her and kept Bane alone.

 

[BatLobster]

Yeah, it logically follows that if Bane was loyal to Talia and Barsad was loyal to Bane...Barsad is also loyal to Talia. But Josh Stewart's performance throughout the movie said a lot about his reverence for Bane and the cause in general.

 

[JackWhite]

So, I was flipping through the Art of The Dark Knight Trilogy book in a store today and came upon this interesting passage.

"One idea that intrigued the writer/director as he considered a sequel was how he might interpret the Joker in the hyperrael world of Batman Begins, and how the Joker might act as the catalyst for Bruce Wayne's becoming more entrenched in his Batman mission. 'We'd laid down the idea in Batman Begins that Bruce Wayne's plan in becoming Batman was to do what he could do for a finite period of time,' said Nolan. 'He had something like a five-year plan, a set amount of time he would spend setting Gotham straight, and then he would go off and do something else with his life, because, like anybody else, he wanted a life other than one of vigilantism and subterfuge.'
To borrow from an old aphorism: Men make plans, and the Joker laughs.
'With the reveal of the joker card at the end of Batman Begins,' said Nolan, 'we created the sense that it wasn't going to be as simple as Bruce doing what he could for five years and then getting out."

Idk about the rest of you, but to me that reads like the eight-year retirement was not part of the original plan. And that disappoints me, because thought I did not hate that plot point, I would have much rather seen a movie where Bruce truly gets lost in his monster.

I just watched TDK again this morning, and I do believe some form of exile for Batman was planned. In Rachel's letter she mentions that a day when Gotham no longer needs Batman would possibly come, but a day when Bruce no longer needed Batman would never come.

Perhaps Bruce's self imposed exile as Batman wouldn't be 8 years, but I still think the first act in TDKR would have stayed pretty much the same, at least for Bruce's arc; had Heath lived, and returned as the Joker.

 

[The Joker]

So, I was flipping through the Art of The Dark Knight Trilogy book in a store today and came upon this interesting passage.

"One idea that intrigued the writer/director as he considered a sequel was how he might interpret the Joker in the hyperrael world of Batman Begins, and how the Joker might act as the catalyst for Bruce Wayne's becoming more entrenched in his Batman mission. 'We'd laid down the idea in Batman Begins that Bruce Wayne's plan in becoming Batman was to do what he could do for a finite period of time,' said Nolan. 'He had something like a five-year plan, a set amount of time he would spend setting Gotham straight, and then he would go off and do something else with his life, because, like anybody else, he wanted a life other than one of vigilantism and subterfuge.'
To borrow from an old aphorism: Men make plans, and the Joker laughs.
'With the reveal of the joker card at the end of Batman Begins,' said Nolan, 'we created the sense that it wasn't going to be as simple as Bruce doing what he could for five years and then getting out."

Idk about the rest of you, but to me that reads like the eight-year retirement was not part of the original plan. And that disappoints me, because thought I did not hate that plot point, I would have much rather seen a movie where Bruce truly gets lost in his monster.

Agreed. Darn shame.

 

[BatLobster]

I just watched TDK again this morning, and I do believe some form of exile for Batman was planned. In Rachel's letter she mentions that a day when Gotham no longer needs Batman would possibly come, but a day when Bruce no longer needed Batman would never come.

Perhaps Bruce's self imposed exile as Batman wouldn't be 8 years, but I still think the first act in TDKR would have stayed pretty much the same, at least for Bruce's arc; had Heath lived, and returned as the Joker.

That's a good catch. I always took that quote to mean that he'd just continue being Batman beyond the point of being needed just as a way to deal with his issues, but you're right, that line perfectly plays into the setup of TDKR. Gotham no longer needs Batman, but Bruce does and while he knows enough to walk away, he's emotionally stunted and struggling to find purpose without it.

 

[JackWhite]

That's a good catch. I always took that quote to mean that he'd just continue being Batman beyond the point of being needed just as a way to deal with his issues, but you're right, that line perfectly plays into the setup of TDKR. Gotham no longer needs Batman, but Bruce does and while he knows enough to walk away, he's emotionally stunted and struggling to find purpose without it.

Thanks. I like that angle a lot too actually. But Nolan had a huge gap where he could have had Alfred mention that Bruce was out there fighting crime until the Dent Act came into full force and then Bruce still couldn't move on.

But at least Nolan did give us a Bruce Wayne who was lost without Batman after the clean energy project failed. But it would have been cool to hear of a story that had happened between TDK and TDKR.

 

[BatLobster]

Yeah, I agree. I wish they had kept that window a little more open too, and honestly I think the only reason they didn't is because it's much cleaner in exposition terms to just have it be 8 years and the last time he was out there was the night Dent died. But I have to admit it'd be great if there could have been another animated tie-in to tell the story of what happened leading up to the Dent Act being passed.

I still like to think Bruce was at least keeping an eye on things on the Bat-computer for a while. Alfred did imply that he had spent some time down there.

 

[RAINMAKER]

Bane is the "necessary evil" that came to destroy a city with his partner(and yes, I will always believe them to be partners) Talia in destroying a city that Ra's al Ghul tried to(but this time, they weren't going to press the restart button on Gotham; they were just going to blow it all up to Hell), but even with being this "necessary evil", there's nothing wrong in showing your feelings and views on children since that calls back to Bane's time in the Pit when he protected a child from all of the other inmates.

I don't disagree with this, but I think a lot of us are having trouble understanding why exactly Bane and Talia want to blow Gotham City to bits while killing themselves in the process? However, I do understand that Talia wanted Batman to witness his failure in saving his city. But again, I don't know why she would go through the trouble of killing herself just to make Batman suffer. Bane's motivation is even more bizarre.

I gotta say, for the longest I believed them to have been the League of Shadows, but I'm really getting the idea that Talia and Bane were the LoS, and those men? They were always Bane's men since their coup in Africa mentioned by Alfred and Talia just came into this plan and then it became, more or less, a "League of Shadows 2.0"(so it kinda reflects how I always called them the LoS 2.0 anyways, but now it's just they became that title after the partnership of Talia al Ghul and Bane).

Just another reason why I believe they are the LOS 2.0. When Bane was ex-communicated, he and Talia had a lot of time to put together their own crew.

 

[JackWhite]

Yeah, I can't buy that the last night Bruce was in the cape and cowl was the night Dent died. I mean, did the Dent Act come into affect the very next morning? lol.

A Gotham Knight 2 tie-in would have been so nice. Batman vs Black mask and Penguin, who are trying to reestablish the mob, only through the "freak" mentality. It would have given some fans there TDK 2.0 fix, while whetting the majorities appetites for TDKR.

 

[JackWhite]

I don't disagree with this, but I think a lot of us are having trouble understanding why exactly Bane and Talia want to blow Gotham City to bits while killing themselves? However, I do understand that Talia wanted Batman to witness his failure in saving his city. But again, I don't know why she would go through the trouble of killing herself just to make Batman suffer. Bane's motivation is even more bizarre.

I have no problem with a twisted version of the LOS lead by Talia and Bane. It's just the way it's executed.

 

[Snow Queen]

I don't disagree with this, but I think a lot of us are having trouble understanding why exactly Bane and Talia want to blow Gotham City to bits while killing themselves in the process? However, I do understand that Talia wanted Batman to witness his failure in saving his city. But again, I don't know why she would go through the trouble of killing herself just to make Batman suffer. Bane's motivation is even more bizarre.

Why do it when they will die too? Much like suicide bombers, they believe in their cause thoroughly despite how people on the outside may point out flaws in their logic. I don't think I need to cite modern examples.

 

[RAINMAKER]

Why do it when they will die too? Much like suicide bombers, they believe in their cause thoroughly despite how people on the outside may point out flaws in their logic. I don't think I need to cite modern examples.

Yes, but what was their cause? To fulfill Ra's Al Ghul's destiny? That's actually not what Ra's wanted. So there had to have been another reason.

 

[Snow Queen]

Yes, but what was their cause? To fulfill Ra's Al Ghul's destiny? That's actually not what Ra's wanted. So there had to have been another reason.

Again, it doesn't make sense from an outside perspective. I see it the same way that The Crusades were started to spread Christianity through violent methods in a way that many Christians today would consider a misinterpretation of scripture. I took it that they missed the point of Ra's message to an extent and ended up believing their own twisted version of it all.

 

[RAINMAKER]

Again, it doesn't make sense from an outside perspective. I see it the same way that The Crusades were started to spread Christianity through violent methods in a way that many Christians today would consider a misinterpretation of scripture. I took it that they missed the point of Ra's message to an extent and ended up believing their own twisted version of it all.

Fair enough.