The Dark Knight Rises Love Interest in the Third Film

[baleheadbrasil]

I was being ironic...

 

[baleheadbrasil]

He's had a kid with Talia, Damian, the new Robin, although he was drugged and basically raped by her.
Terry McGuiniss is also his son, since Amanda Waller replaced his father's DNA with Batman's. So basically his father shot little bat sperm and Terry is Bruce's son.

He can be drugged by her but it wasn´t the only time they made love.
Or you´re telling me that she did that all the times...
I don´t read the comics but I know it because I have many friends that read them.
I don´t read because I have no patience. t:
I prefer only watching the movies.

 

[Mr. Earle]

He can be drugged by her but it wasn´t the only time they made love.
Or you´re telling me that she did that all the times...
I don´t read the comics but I know it because I have many friends that read them.
I don´t read because I have no patience. t:
I prefer only watching the movies.

They ve had sex many times, but Batman would never allow her to conceive, so she drugged him. Something like that.

 

[baleheadbrasil]

She needed to do it...but it was one time only. After he ended up enjoying it haha

 

[QueenChaos]

I am conflicted. Part of me wants him to have a love interest, but I think it is just because I want to see a leading female somewhere in the film. I mean, it would be cool if a female came in and wasn't a love interest - in fact, that would be perfect.
Personally, let's be realistic here...
Batman/Bruce Wayne was and is in love with Rachel Dawes, there are all these residual feelings left regarding that relationship and the fact that she died in such a brutal way. There is also the idea that both him and Harvey Dent were in love with her. And hey, also the possible fact that as mentioned many times - Maggie had supposedly signed on for at least two films in the franchise. At first I had this crazy idea that maybe that meant Rachel was alive, but I think the more obvious thing is that there are going to be *gasp* FLASHBACK SCENES! Bruce WILL have a love interest, because he ought to be still thinking of Rachel and there ought to be a lot of memories that he is dealing with. On top of that, Two-Face/Harvey Dent will have a love interest too - because he was also in love with her and lost her, if it turns out he is going to be in any third film that may come to be (this is my hope anyway), and part of what drove him loony-tunes is the fact that she was taken from him. Rachel Dawes is going to be an insanely prominent presence in the third film. There is no room for another love interest, it would be absurd and unnecessary - forget about it! If you are talking about a seductress, now that's something else. And that could be anybody, but who knows if that is a route they will want to go with B3.

 

[baleheadbrasil]

Bruce mourn for Rachel as a widower his whole life...feel sorry for him!
He doesn´t deserve that!
For God´s sake...Rachel is DEAD!
Dead and buried...forget her.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Bruce mourn for Rachel as a widower his whole life...feel sorry for him!
He doesn´t deserve that!
For God´s sake...Rachel is DEAD!
Dead and buried...forget her.

Even to a guy like me,thats cold.

 

[GaiusBaltar]

Personally, let's be realistic here...
Batman/Bruce Wayne was and is in love with Rachel Dawes, there are all these residual feelings left regarding that relationship and the fact that she died in such a brutal way. There is also the idea that both him and Harvey Dent were in love with her. And hey, also the possible fact that as mentioned many times - Maggie had supposedly signed on for at least two films in the franchise. At first I had this crazy idea that maybe that meant Rachel was alive, but I think the more obvious thing is that there are going to be *gasp* FLASHBACK SCENES! Bruce WILL have a love interest, because he ought to be still thinking of Rachel and there ought to be a lot of memories that he is dealing with. On top of that, Two-Face/Harvey Dent will have a love interest too - because he was also in love with her and lost her, if it turns out he is going to be in any third film that may come to be (this is my hope anyway), and part of what drove him loony-tunes is the fact that she was taken from him. Rachel Dawes is going to be an insanely prominent presence in the third film. There is no room for another love interest, it would be absurd and unnecessary - forget about it! If you are talking about a seductress, now that's something else. And that could be anybody, but who knows if that is a route they will want to go with B3.

There is a very strong possibility Bruce was not in love with Rachel and never was. Harvey was. Yet yes, we all know she was dear to Bruce and he will mourn her.

Sigining for more than one film is a traditional contract in Hollywood that seeks to secure actors. It is not enforced everytime.

Flashbacks scene posit a great deal of trouble and, as noted here before, Nolan almost never makes extensive ones. Flashbacks for the sole purpose of showing emotional turmoil without any link to the plot whatsoever are always short in good narrative. I wouldn't consume much time.

Harvey/Two-Face will NOT appear in a Nolan sequel (because he's dead, duh). Mark my words.
The issues of flashbacks also apply to him.

She also accomplished her function, assisting Bruce on going from point A (Begins) to point B (TDK). She won't play a prominent part, especially because what you're suggesting is a cameo. Even in that extremely rare and improbable case, there would still be plenty of room for another character that is quite different from Rachel and can bring new dynamics to the new Bruce he has become now. Enter Selina, Rachel's complete opposite.

It is not absurd, it's just logic.

 

[Mr. Earle]

There is a very strong possibility Bruce was not in love with Rachel and never was. Harvey was. Yet yes, we all know she was dear to Bruce and he will mourn her.

No, Bruce was in love with her. He was about to quit being batman so that "they could be together".

 

[BrazilianBatFan]

There is a very strong possibility Bruce was not in love with Rachel and never was. Harvey was. Yet yes, we all know she was dear to Bruce and he will mourn her.

I agree. There is the possibility that he was trying to convince himself that he was "normal" (los, he isn't). Another important point is that he was kind of stalking Harvey and Rachel. I know he wanted to check Harvey but he also used the information collected to try and make things bad for them as a couple. Don't forget he bought the restaurant just so he could boast about it in front of Harvey etc.

 

[Majik1387]

No, Bruce was in love with her. He was about to quit being batman so that "they could be together".

Umm no.

 

[Mr. Earle]

Umm no.

Umm, yeah.

 

[QueenChaos]

*shifty eyes*
I'm not going to add into this uhm no uhm yeah sort of stuff. Whether he truly loved her or not, he is still pining over her and at the VERY least thought he loved her - thought he wanted HER and nobody else. This has to be prominent in the next film, in my opinion. Maybe he can be "opened up" to other options near the middle of the film, maybe. But think about it, let's guess and say it is like a two and a half hour film. Now for the sake of I guess "realism" - I don't exactly think he could move on so easily, I don't know - it could be that I just don't want so much romance in the next film, but I don't think it is realistic for him to come to a full acknowledgement of his true feelings and then decide also to move on and get with someone else. He has got to have that idea in mind "the next person I get this close to, will die too" - thus his loneliness that is often seen in more serious or realistic interpretations of the character. Yes I know, time goes on between films - but it doesn't *seem* like the director's style to just throw that emotional trauma in between and forget about it for the film. So with that being said, two and a half hours, what's going to happen? Well I hope that romance isn't a big issue. Batman is on the run, he has a lot of other things to think about and is tormented by what he has lost.
I know, EVERYONE says Two-Face is dead (and I knew that would be addressed, I almost edited out things about Two-Face just so I wouldn't have to face all the arguments lol).
Yes it makes the most sense, yes it would be perfect for a lot of reasons - but in my personal opinion I feel there is a strong chance that he isn't dead. A possibility that it was vague enough that he was either unconscious or they thought he was dead, that the funeral was directed at Harvey Dent - and since it is a matter of authoritive figures it is easy to keep people thinking certain things. Maybe There was a decision made that those who knew about Harvey's descent wanted Gotham to remember him for the good man he was, and not for who he had become - and therefore maybe "Two-Face" is hidden away in Arkham. Gotham has a lot of dirty little secrets. I know the majority seem to believe otherwise, but I am just throwing that out there.
I would love to see Selina Kyle/Catwoman around, but I just don't think there has to be a prominent romance there - like I said, as a seductress, it could make sense. I have thought of a few ways in which she would fit. This third film shouldn't hold onto the feature of romance so much, it has been done, and if this is a trilogy and that's where it ends - it really isn't necessary to throw another romance in there when there are other things to cover in that timeframe. I think maybe if it had to be there, it could be best if it was more "hinted" at that he was into whichever female character was around, but wouldn't allow himself to be openly infatuated with her. Conflict and such.

 

[Closerframe]

There is a very strong possibility Bruce was not in love with Rachel and never was. Harvey was. Yet yes, we all know she was dear to Bruce and he will mourn her.

Sigining for more than one film is a traditional contract in Hollywood that seeks to secure actors. It is not enforced everytime.

Flashbacks scene posit a great deal of trouble and, as noted here before, Nolan almost never makes extensive ones. Flashbacks for the sole purpose of showing emotional turmoil without any link to the plot whatsoever are always short in good narrative. I wouldn't consume much time.

Harvey/Two-Face will NOT appear in a Nolan sequel (because he's dead, duh). Mark my words.
The issues of flashbacks also apply to him.

She also accomplished her function, assisting Bruce on going from point A (Begins) to point B (TDK). She won't play a prominent part, especially because what you're suggesting is a cameo. Even in that extremely rare and improbable case, there would still be plenty of room for another character that is quite different from Rachel and can bring new dynamics to the new Bruce he has become now. Enter Selina, Rachel's complete opposite.

It is not absurd, it's just logic.

But there is a stronger possibility that he did indeed love Rachel, its present when he's attempting to give his mantel over to Dent in the third act of the film.

An even worst idea than presenting flashbacks of Rachel, is having someone new come into the picture to replace her when Bruce just lost her. It would basically destroy what was created in BB and TDK with Bruce and Rachel's relationship. If Bruce did indeed just spring up and start having feelings for this new woman it would create a conflict with the overall storyline of whatever Batman is trying to do. Selina's role in this film would possibly be overshadowed by the more important stories that have yet to be told.

So like I've said before, and I'm saying it again, a love interest is not necessary for the third Batman film.

 

[the dmg]

My only problem with a love interest is this. If this is Nolan's last Batfilm, it doesn't make sense to add a love interest for one movie only. There's no time for it to develop. I'd rather see Talia.

 

[Rodrigo90]

A love interest is not essential to Batman,especially with the situation that TDK created. Does he a need GF in the comics for it to be a success? The Animated Series? Story and character development are the most important aspects to focus on,IMO. As long as the LI is a pivotal part of the story,then its acceptable. But as I said,not essential.

 

[TheVileOne]

Rachel was a forced contrived love interest character anyway. Hated Rachel.

I'd love it if they could figure out how to bring in Talia, but I doubt it.

Jeph Loeb ticks me off so much for teasing Batman/Catwoman like that in HUSH. What a waste of time. I enjoyed it for the brief period it was there.

 

[GaiusBaltar]

No, Bruce was in love with her. He was about to quit being batman so that "they could be together".

Wanting a normal life is not the same as being in love with her. She was her best chance back to the real world. I'm sure he thought he was in love with her. But hey, ultimately, he didn't quit being Batman, right?

I'm not going to add into this uhm no uhm yeah sort of stuff. Whether he truly loved her or not, he is still pining over her and at the VERY least thought he loved her - thought he wanted HER and nobody else. This has to be prominent in the next film, in my opinion.

I agree with this, this her being prominent doesn't prevent other potential love interests from being added. And whether or no he was in love is indeed important, because if someone else comes along for whom he truly feels something, the transition wouldn't be that forced. In fact, if done right, it wouldn't feel forced at all.

He has got to have that idea in mind "the next person I get this close to, will die too" - thus his loneliness that is often seen in more serious or realistic interpretations of the character. Yes I know, time goes on between films - but it doesn't *seem* like the director's style to just throw that emotional trauma in between and forget about it for the film. So with that being said, two and a half hours, what's going to happen? Well I hope that romance isn't a big issue. Batman is on the run, he has a lot of other things to think about and is tormented by what he has lost.

He doesn't need to get too close to someone to have feelings for her. Take Catwoman, for instance. They obviously get sparks from each other, but you can't say exactly they are close. He willingly pushes her away all the time because he doesn't want to let anyone near. But the interaction still happens.

In fact, the time needed to feel that kind of chemistry is almost nul. We're not talking about developing a relationship here or go at the lengths Burton went in Returns, with dinner dates at Wayne Manor and stuff like that. Nope. That would detract from the story. But there are plenty of other routes that allow action and character interaction take place at the same time.

I would love to see Selina Kyle/Catwoman around, but I just don't think there has to be a prominent romance there - like I said, as a seductress, it could make sense.

Any female character that gets that is going to be viewed by people as the love interest. But in reality she would be a secondary character, an anti-heroine, an ideollogical foe... more than a mere love interest, like Rachel was.

This third film shouldn't hold onto the feature of romance so much.

Agreed BUT... do you think the first two films had romance as a prominent part? Compare them to ANY other superhero film. Thank you.

But there is a stronger possibility that he did indeed love Rachel, its present when he's attempting to give his mantle over to Dent in the third act of the film.

I believe you meant First Act, and the two elements are not necessarily connected. He was most likely renouncing to Batman as a service to himself, not to be with Rachel.

An even worst idea than presenting flashbacks of Rachel, is having someone new come into the picture to replace her when Bruce just lost her.

When you think about it, only equivalent characters can replace each other's places. Selina being practically Rachel's opposite, that possibility is out of the question. There is no way to repeat the same dynamics with Catwoman, no way at all.

It would basically destroy what was created in BB and TDK with Bruce and Rachel's relationship.

What relationship?

If Bruce did indeed just spring up and start having feelings for this new woman it would create a conflict with the overall storyline of whatever Batman is trying to do.

Why? Because Bruce would feel conflicted about it? Since when the protagonist having conflicts is a bad thing?

Selina's role in this film would possibly be overshadowed by the more important stories that have yet to be told.

There are multiple ways to ingrain her character into all the other storylines that could take place and many of those ways have been thoroughly discussed here and at the Catwoman Casting thread.

Selina's role in this film would possibly be overshadowed by the more important stories that have yet to be told.

Necessary? Maybe not. But does it add something? Well, with certain characters: Oh yes.

 

[Mr. Earle]

What are you talking about? He was spying on her dating with Dent (when he was stitching his arm), he was pretty jealous that they were holding hands at the restaurant, and he asked her whether they could be together when he quits just like she had promised.

 

[ALittlePush]

Whilst I'm not completely against the idea of a new love interest, I don't want one thrown in just for the sake of it.

Although a year is meant to of past between BB and TDK, Bruce and Rachel's relationship didn't really progress much.I think Bruce did love Rachel. However, I think Rachel realised that it was never going to work out like they planned. It was all just a pipe dream.


Lets not forget, Bruce never actually got the chance to read Rachel's letter. As far as he's concerned, him and Rachel were going to live happily ever after until Joker threw a spanner in the works. Bruce has no idea Rachel was going to leave him.

In the third film, I think Bruce should try and move on. However, I think he should feel guilty about it. He should think that he is letting Rachel down. Alfred, seeing how Bruce is torturing himself over his feelings, should reveal the contents of Rachel's letter. Bruce's reaction should be one of anger and denial. He would avoid the subject. However, as the film progresses he starts to accept the fact that Rachel chose Harvey. At the end of the film, he should have fully accepted Rachel's decision and there should be hints that he is finally ready to move on with his life.

 

[GaiusBaltar]

What are you talking about? He was spying on her dating with Dent (when he was stitching his arm), he was pretty jealous that they were holding hands at the restaurant, and he asked her whether they could be together when he quits just like she had promised.

And your point is...?

 

[GaiusBaltar]

Whilst I'm not completely against the idea of a new love interest, I don't want one thrown in just for the sake of it.

I don't think anyone here wants that.

In the third film, I think Bruce should try and move on. However, I think he should feel guilty about it. He should think that he is letting Rachel down. Alfred, seeing how Bruce is torturing himself over his feelings, should reveal the contents of Rachel's letter. Bruce's reaction should be one of anger and denial. He would avoid the subject. However, as the film progresses he starts to accept the fact that Rachel chose Harvey.

Good thinking. The sooner he understands he was never meant to have a normal life with Rachel, the quicker he'll understand his own path.

 

[Mr. Earle]

And your point is...?

That he loved her.

 

[Laderlappen]

I think we should even skip alot of that moving on stuff.

 

[terry78]

**** it, just stick Black Canary in there then and have them get it on.