The Dark Knight Rises Is Nolan's Batman the DEFINITIVE Batman?

[Ltjdangle]

I would say Nolan's films are the definitive Batman films, but after watching TDK (and being completely blown away), I almost felt that Batman was one of the worst acted characters in the film just by comparison to all the other great performances. Don't get me wrong, CB did a good job, but I agree with November Rain, he is still sort of soft and clearly wasn't the best performance in the film.

 

[CHEZ]

I thought Bale was great, he only over-did the voice a few times, but he is still the best Bruce Wayne/Batman so far. The reason why Bale's performance suffers in comparison to the others is that the Wayne/Batman character is limited in personality.
Whereas everyone else is free for more characterization.

 

[Viper81]

If we're talking the original Batman, then Nolan's version is WAY off the beaten path of that. Burton did a better job of that.

As far as the mythology behind Batman and keeping to the comics, then Nolan NAILS it.

To me, the Nolan movies ARE Batman.

But I'll admit, if he doesn't bring in Robin I'll be pretty disappointed. Not because I like Robin all that much, but:

1. I WANT to see how Nolan handles Robin. I garauntee you that we'd love him if Nolan did it.

2. Like it or not, Robin IS a HUGE part of Batman's story.

 

[spideymouse]

why this thread even here? This should be in TDK forum...

This thread has to do with all of Nolan's Batman movies, past, present and future, not just TDK.

If we're talking the original Batman, then Nolan's version is WAY off the beaten path of that. Burton did a better job of that.

As far as the mythology behind Batman and keeping to the comics, then Nolan NAILS it.

To me, the Nolan movies ARE Batman.

But I'll admit, if he doesn't bring in Robin I'll be pretty disappointed. Not because I like Robin all that much, but:

1. I WANT to see how Nolan handles Robin. I garauntee you that we'd love him if Nolan did it.

2. Like it or not, Robin IS a HUGE part of Batman's story.

The incarnations of Batman that inspire Nolan's Batman almost unanimously include Robin, Catwoman, and other essential Batman characters whom people claim that Nolan's universe could never include.

And that's exactly my question:
If Nolan has created a movie universe that can't include essential Batman characters, are we really seeing the essential Batman?

 

[CHEZ]

I think the definitive Batman should be considered the creators' original vision. Pre-dating the inclusion of Robin and all that turned Batman into a happy cartoony family fun character.
Kane's Batman was a lone figure. Miller and Moore honored that original vision. Making him more relevant to today's sentimentalities.

It just seems to me, that if Bob Kane were alive today, he would say this is the Batman he envisioned. A lone figure taking on the corrupt underworld that has brought a city to its knees.
The definition of a character ultimately belongs to his creator and Bob Kane introduced a lone dark tortured hero to the world.

 

[spideymouse]

I think the definitive Batman should be considered the creators' original vision. Pre-dating the inclusion of Robin and all that turned Batman into a happy cartoony family fun character.
Kane's Batman was a lone figure. Miller and Moore honored that original vision. Making him more relevant to today's sentimentalities.

It just seems to me, that if Bob Kane were alive today, he would say this is the Batman he envisioned. A lone figure taking on the corrupt underworld that has brought a city to its knees.
The definition of a character ultimately belongs to his creator and Bob Kane introduced a lone dark tortured hero to the world.

So we should forsake 68 years of Robin for the one initial year of solo Batman?

 

[CHEZ]

So we should forsake 68 years of Robin for the one initial year of solo Batman?

Yes.

 

[spideymouse]

Yes.

I respectfully disagree.

 

[CHEZ]

I respectfully disagree.

That's okay.

 

[TheDarkKnight08]

Personally, I think so. It's not about the other characters, it about Batman himself. That's what I get out of the title of the thread. Nolan really gets his personality, his looks, and the brutality of him. In TDK, I felt that's the closest we've gotten to the comic book version. Smart, calculating, paraniod. Though it's not all there yet, kinda like Year One Batman, you can tell that Nolan's getting the ball rolling, especially for the third.

 

[CHEZ]

Batman over the years has seen many incarnations, attracting different kinds of fans.
Those who like the campy version and those who like the dark version.

I like and identify with the lone vigilante. Nolan and Bale seem to think that way as well.
It's just an opinion of taste. It's likely that if Nolan decides to direct a third Batman film it will be his last. I can understand that. I hope he doesn't bring Robin in, because I think Batman is far more interesting alone. Once this Nolan/Batman franchise if completed another director will step in to introduce a new bat-franchise and if they bring Robin in, fine, but at least we got a few robin-free movies.

The question still remains whether or not Nolan's is the definitive Batman, and I think he really did capture what a real Batman would truly be like if he existed. That's all I ask from a director, is to make a character like this as real as possible. Take it seriously, handle it with care, put every ounce of your heart into. Nolan did that and I think he pulled it off brilliantly.

 

[Hyden]

The Batman we all know from the canonized comics of DKR, TLH, Long Halloween and most of his modern incarnations, including the Dini/Timm universe is a really tough as nails, stoic, always knows best Batman, who rarely makes major mistakes or questions the efficacy of his mission. These interpretations, with little exception even in "early batman" stories like Year One and TLH deal with a matured Batman who really isn't that conflicted.
Nolan's Batman is still a young buck, still dealing with his big issues: His angst and remorse at his parents death, and how too successfully fight crime (Batman Begins) and the moral and ethical concerns of justice and vigilantism (The Dark Knight) and of course, Nolans insular neo-realist movie world doesn't provide for the off the wall elements of the comics, or the inclusion of the entire rogues and allies gallery. Thankfully, these movies have been treated as movies, and not comic books, and that's one of the main reasons they're so far ahead of the competition.

I think you need to Broaden the scope of the question you're asking

Are the Nolan films true to the letter of the comics? They sure as hell aren't, and I wouldn't want them to be, the comics aren't even true to the comics, stuff gets retconned all the time, and face it, no matter how great the story is on the page it would look pretty bad directly transferred to the screen.

Is Begins the definitive Batman origin story? With the exception of the third act round-up, I'd say most certainly, and i think anybody who would ever try to retell his origin on film is on a fools errand.

Is the Dark Knight the definitive take on the Joker and the bats vs. joker conflict? without factoring in one one might say about perma-white or origin story, i'd say certainly, it's a take on the character and the conflict that encompasses all of the philosophy and history of this age old battle while giving it a brilliant, griddy twist. It may not be a direct adaptation of the Killing Joke, but without a doubt it pays tribute to it and incorporates all its ideas of madness and justice and corruptibility and conflict in entirely it's own way without sacrificing the impact.

I think the real question is, do these films do the comics the justice they deserve? I think that's a resounding yes. Because even though the film does not follow any specific arc to the letter, it incorporates thematic and plot elements from a plethora of stories throughout the history of the characters and nails them in their dramatic essence while telling A Batman Story that can certainly hold its own against any of the comics it was inspired by, and really, that's the best you can ask for.

 

[CHEZ]

The Batman we all know from the canonized comics of DKR, TLH, Long Halloween and most of his modern incarnations, including the Dini/Timm universe is a really tough as nails, stoic, always knows best Batman, who rarely makes major mistakes or questions the efficacy of his mission. These interpretations, with little exception even in "early batman" stories like Year One and TLH deal with a matured Batman who really isn't that conflicted.
Nolan's Batman is still a young buck, still dealing with his big issues: His angst and remorse at his parents death, and how too successfully fight crime (Batman Begins) and the moral and ethical concerns of justice and vigilantism (The Dark Knight) and of course, Nolans insular neo-realist movie world doesn't provide for the off the wall elements of the comics, or the inclusion of the entire rogues and allies gallery. Thankfully, these movies have been treated as movies, and not comic books, and that's one of the main reasons they're so far ahead of the competition.

I think you need to Broaden the scope of the question you're asking

Are the Nolan films true to the letter of the comics? They sure as hell aren't, and I wouldn't want them to be, the comics aren't even true to the comics, stuff gets retconned all the time, and face it, no matter how great the story is on the page it would look pretty bad directly transferred to the screen.

Is Begins the definitive Batman origin story? With the exception of the third act round-up, I'd say most certainly, and i think anybody who would ever try to retell his origin on film is on a fools errand.

Is the Dark Knight the definitive take on the Joker and the bats vs. joker conflict? without factoring in one one might say about perma-white or origin story, i'd say certainly, it's a take on the character and the conflict that encompasses all of the philosophy and history of this age old battle while giving it a brilliant, griddy twist. It may not be a direct adaptation of the Killing Joke, but without a doubt it pays tribute to it and incorporates all its ideas of madness and justice and corruptibility and conflict in entirely it's own way without sacrificing the impact.

I think the real question is, do these films do the comics the justice they deserve? I think that's a resounding yes. Because even though the film does not follow any specific arc to the letter, it incorporates thematic and plot elements from a plethora of stories throughout the history of the characters and nails them in their dramatic essence while telling A Batman Story that can certainly hold its own against any of the comics it was inspired by, and really, that's the best you can ask for.

Beautifully said, Hyden.

 

[Doc Samson]

I feel it is, which is why I think they should take the next batch of films down the road in different directions. Maybe a Batman Beyond or The Dark Knight Returns film, but honestly, who could do a better origin story than Batman Begins? A better present day duel betweent the Joker & Bats than TDK?

 

[CHEZ]

Exactly! If Nolan doesn't make a fourth movie, then they should take the Batman concept into a new direction and go into a "Batman Beyond" franchise. Once that's done, it would be incredible to see Frank Miller's "Dark Knight Returns" on the big screen, and it would be kinda cool to see Bale return as an older Wayne/Batman.

 

[November Rain]

I feel it is, which is why I think they should take the next batch of films down the road in different directions. Maybe a Batman Beyond or The Dark Knight Returns film, but honestly, who could do a better origin story than Batman Begins? A better present day duel betweent the Joker & Bats than TDK?

Batman begins doesn't do bruce wayne that much justice.

He's still kinda young and led either by ra's or by rachel. I mean he needed for rachel to open his eyes to what gotham was truelly like and for him to step up and do something about it. I watched Mask of the phantasm the night before i watched the dark knight and that bruce was 100% determined to fight crime even as a youngster, it was always his intention. Nolan's batman didn't

The joker's first appearance was always going to be a bit of a mind screw for batman but in the dark knight the joker completely owned batman and in my eyes was seen to be his superior but considered him too fun to remove. Nolan's batman in that film really never had any sort of plan to deal with the joker and was a headless chicken throughout always waiting for his next move and never being one step ahead or even at the same level.

This came across when they met face to face in the jail cell when batman went all thugish on him instead of playing some incredibly detailed game of mind chess. The joker knew who he was and toyed with him for the entire film. He heavily relied on others a large part of the time.

I could put this down to bruce still being a young batman who can come across intimidating to the average mob but he had no effect on the joker.

I didn't see them as equals and opposites, bats wasn't the formidable hero i expected but maybe he wasn't supposed to be.

It doesn't make him definitive but doesn't affect the story.

I think a riddler performance where he can be seen to be an equal to the villain intellectually and with strategy would be better in showcasing a definitive batman who is capable with dealing with any situation he's thrown into.

 

[allhollows86]

Since it looks like batman is going to break almost every record, has there been any news from WB or Nolan on a sequel happening. Especially since ComicCon is going on right now

 

[Rikxiepoo]

The Nolanverse defines the Batman that we, as an audience, feel the character requires, given all the tragedies and the circumstances that surround Bruce Wayne and Batman.

 

[ANTOINE X]

Nolan has one of the best batman to date. But that doesn't mean he has the definitive batman. Actually I want the next director to challenge him and do the exact opposite: which mean not too realistic...and I want the grey & black costume back .

 

[CHEZ]

Well, if we talk about the costume, I don't care how practical Nolan's version is, I really don't like it. It doesn't look good and it still doesn't move good. It still carries the stigma of past Batman films. It's clearly been improved, but come on, they can do better than that. I am not saying spandex, but give him complete maneuverability and just say it's bullet/knife proof etc.
They should have gone with a new look, and it's unlikely we'll see any change in the next movie either.
I would love to see a black and grey Batman costume as well. With a black bat on the chest and, please, no more gold colored utility belt. Go with black.

And the cowl from the fan made film Batman: Dead End was perfect.

 

[REDophile]

Burton is a fantasy-driven director, so his Batman was more in his own world. On the other hand, Nolan's is grounded in a Gotham City as close to real life as possible. Both versions are solid, but I give the edge to Nolan because Batman is probably the most human superhero.
The only problem I have with Nolan is his shunning of characters (not just Robin) he doesn't think are human enough or wouldn't work in his universe when they are important to the Batman mythos. Furthermore, absolutely no disrespect to his great direction with the series, but I don't like how he wants it utterly independent from all other DC comics characters and events.

 

[Slain]

I don't like how the question was worded, but I do think that this adaptation is faithful to the comics.

As said before, there are many adaptations of Batman, and this is a very good one. But it definitley isn't the "definitive" version. There is no definitive version, you just have the versions that you enjoy seeing the most, and of course, there are flaws in each.

Nolans Batman still remains to be my favorite, followed by the animated series- I just love the realism and darkness he adds into the universe.

 

[Doc Samson]

Batman begins doesn't do bruce wayne that much justice.

He's still kinda young and led either by ra's or by rachel. I mean he needed for rachel to open his eyes to what gotham was truelly like and for him to step up and do something about it. I watched Mask of the phantasm the night before i watched the dark knight and that bruce was 100% determined to fight crime even as a youngster, it was always his intention. Nolan's batman didn't

The joker's first appearance was always going to be a bit of a mind screw for batman but in the dark knight the joker completely owned batman and in my eyes was seen to be his superior but considered him too fun to remove. Nolan's batman in that film really never had any sort of plan to deal with the joker and was a headless chicken throughout always waiting for his next move and never being one step ahead or even at the same level.

This came across when they met face to face in the jail cell when batman went all thugish on him instead of playing some incredibly detailed game of mind chess. The joker knew who he was and toyed with him for the entire film. He heavily relied on others a large part of the time.

I could put this down to bruce still being a young batman who can come across intimidating to the average mob but he had no effect on the joker.

I didn't see them as equals and opposites, bats wasn't the formidable hero i expected but maybe he wasn't supposed to be.

It doesn't make him definitive but doesn't affect the story.

I think a riddler performance where he can be seen to be an equal to the villain intellectually and with strategy would be better in showcasing a definitive batman who is capable with dealing with any situation he's thrown into.

I hear what your saying, but in the context of these two movies, he's only been Batman for about close to a year, and in almost every iteration, he wasn't prepared for the Joker. His goal was to take down the mob, how could he be prepared for someone like the Joker? There's plenty of stories left to tell, but i think unless you go in a different direction, your either gonna retread things that Nolan has done, or Tim Burton.

Now if you do a faithful The Dark Knight Returns, you can have the comic costumes, the Superman/Batman crossover everyone wants to see, another great (but different) showdown with Two-Face & The Joker, and you can introduce Robin in a creative way. All those things would make it very different from anything we've gotten so far, any less and people may be in for more of the same...

 

[Nepenthes]

I think for the wider public this will certainly be the definitive Batman, for the next ten years or so, until they get a new director.

 

[CHEZ]

Nolan's Batman is definitely the most realistic Batman we have ever seen.