The Dark Knight Rises Opening Scene

[Nevincer]

I think the nightmare about the Bats in Begins screams Bane from the comics, so I could easily see that being paralleled in a movie involving Bane's origins. It's too perfect, eh...

 

[The_Raganork]

I never mentioned Ra's Al Ghul in my post, though. I simply think both of them being pent up in prison, reflecting on their childhood, what got them there, and then a grand breakout, would make for a perfect introduction to Bane for the film, especially for all those entirely unfamiliar with the character.

He doesn't even have to know Ra's exists, I wasn't saying Ra's has to approach or recruit him, I think his story will work much better if he has his own path and established arc, without needing to be trained by a Ducard-like figure.

Sorry, I got you and Pagan confused.

I like your idea...it's a little <too> close for my personal taste but, I can see some creativity in that.

I'd love if Bane escaped Prison systematically, not by punching people til he's out.

Devising a plan and just walking out as he outwits people, then of course have some opposition and crush them with his physical strength.

The whole "CAGED DEATH MATCH, BANE VS.______" is really very lame; we've seen a million movies like that.

He's brutal yes but, that doesn't mean we have to be subjected to cliche's of brutality.

At this time in TDK I'm sure people thought Joker would be utilizing laughing gas and whatnot.

A lot of people have a hard time thinking past the characters from the comics and that's a nod to how well the comics are written, brilliant thought out characters but, people have to also remember Nolan has redefined ALL the characters he's used greatly; he's not making a comic book adaption; he's making his own film, his own story based off those characters.

 

[ih8nyy]

I'm thinking a possible GPD chasing Batman type opening scene....

I agree. On the run, cops almost have him and then he manages to slip away.

"Surely, a man who spends his nights scrambling over the rooftops of Gotham wouldn't begrudge me dual identities?"

 

[The_Raganork]

I know they haven't been in the films. I was just making the point that "strategic genius" is a common trait in a lot of members of Batman's rouges gallery. If they were dummies they wouldn't be much of a challenge.

you're wrong that all of Nolan's villains are independent. Crane worked for/with Ra's

and it's "sufficient" not efficient.

His movies are independent from Comics. Many people have worked together it doesn't mean they have to just for the sake of doing it. Bane is a totally big enough character to work without them and if you don't have to add story just for the sake of doing it.

Not that it won't happen; just Nolan hasn't treated his films the way you are suggesting...ever.

well let's hear those great and exciting, new,fresh ideas then instead of dumping on everyone else's. that's easy and anyone can do it.

You asked for it.

Orginally Posted By Raganork8
Did we not all see BB, Ra's is THE character that defines Bruce in the present time. He made Bruce into the man he is.

I said this before he is like Bruce's second father and I have a great belief this film is going to be about which Father Bruce is going to decide to be the son of.

The Man who gave him virtuosity or

The Man who gave him the means to fight injustice?

So it's no surprise to me that a film that features a character who is going to try to convince Bruce to be more philanthropic like his father (Tate) also would include the character who saw Bruce's father as someone weak and urged Bruce to do everything that was necessary to go the distance that his father didn't.

Because a few comics feature Bane and Ra's in the same storyline doesn't mean there isn't another option to have a character that is (so far) STRICTLY a Bruce character be about Bruce.

I'm not saying that he won't have anything to do with Bane, or that he won't have a lot to do with Bane but, this assumption that it can be nothing else always shocks me as Batman Begins is so STRONG in it's implications of Bruce's parts and then Bruce's training.

The Dark Knight Rises

What does that mean? Bruce has run from his League of Shadows heritage because of the fear toxin disaster and TDK showed us (by not showing us) That his parents murder's have taken a side bar to his having to use Wayne tech to make Batman stronger, faster, smarter.

He has to marry those ideas; he has to bring back his Parent's death to continue with his virtue and confront his issue with Ra's and the league of Shadows to remember why he joined them in the first place, what they taught him directly and what they taught him via his confrontation with them.

something I've always explored while watching these films is that at the end of BB Batman says: "I'm not going to kill you...but I don't have to save you"

This is very indicative of the LoS training; it's something I can see Ra's saying; in fact he has a similar line:

You burned my house and left me for dead, consider us even"

What if Ra's was alive during TDK; what would he think of Batman's place in Gotham? Isn't this kind of what he wanted? Batman became gotham's biggest hope and it all comes crashing down, the one person who can protect them is in their crosshairs, if he's destroyed by the people of Gotham then that's it.

Quote:
"When the Chips are down These Civilized people, will eat each other"
Or eat him? Turning on Batman IS turning on Gotham, surely they don't have a choice given the information they have but:

"sometimes people deserve to have their faith rewarded"

Shouldn't Bruce/Bat's faith in his city be rewarded? and if it isn't; isn't this Ra's ultimate win?

Now how does that fit in with Young Ra's?

Seeing some of Ra's motives, some of who he was to become the man we know in BB might serve as some insight to who Batman is becoming, a parallel story of sorts.

I don't consider Ra's evil; he's willing to do things for the "greater good" that many people wouldn't; in certain situations, this may make him the hero. He gave Bruce purpose, a new life, turned him from a mourning child to a powerful man.

Exploring briefly what makes Ra's the way he was, what made the man who taught Bruce how to fight crime, might show us more clearly where Batman is failing and what he can do to "Rise"

If we know more about the creator we may learn more about the creation and if Batman can avoid the same falls that turned Ra's Al Ghul into the leader of a group of assassins then maybe he can become something more.

His goal in BB was to become a Symbol, infinite, eternal, incorruptible.

He failed at this, the vision of Batman is tarnished; so maybe its time to look back at the ideals that made Batman in the first place to help him heal those wounds and become the Batman he intended to be.

Ra's motives can be clear, how he goes about things still stays mysterious. I agree his mysteriousness should be kept because that's the appeal of the character.

Young Ra's doesn't need to be a huge thing and If I were doing the film I'd fragment it throughout how long the film is.

What we're exploring are ideas from Young Ra's and Ideals he may have held at some point and then watching the mainstory and seeing where they fit in with each other.

It won't be an origins story at all, it'll be a perfectly integrated mirrored story. While the main story is bombastic and action packed, we have these flashbacks that are calmer showing us the creator of Batman, and by watching this in conjunction with our current Batman we can see what Batman is doing right and what he's doing wrong.

since I used the Father Analogy before, think of it as similar to the scenes with Thomas in BB, they were very quick but, they held a lot of meat. As contrast this film can do the same with Ra's.

By watching both we're forced to examine Batman's actions in comparison with Ra's and how Batman is like Ra's Al Ghul ultimately, something he very much wanted to avoid in BB.

In BB Ra's explained he tried to destroy Gotham through despair via the economy

In TDK Batman tried to save Gotham through hope Via politics by LYING about Harvey's involvement.

They may be trying to achieve two different things but, are these not two sides of the same coin?

Yes; in a previous post I mentioned that I think this movie will be the battle of the son.

which Father will Bruce/Bat choose?

The one who gave him virtuosity or the one who gave him the means to fight injustice.

Is Batman Bruce Wayne's alternate Identity? or is Bruce Wayne Batman's Alternate Identity?

Rachel said it perfect in BB

This is your mask

He has to rectify that.

didn't think you'd see this again did you Kynergy?

 

[Pagan]

I disagree. Bruce like everyone else is an amalgam of his experiences. The sum total of his entire life. What defines him is how he reacts to it. How he copes with it. How he channels it. Ra's was a teacher. Just as Joe Chill. Just as Rachel. Just as Gordon. Just as his mother and father and most of all Alfred. They each provide a piece of the puzzle. But what defines him is himself. The choices he makes.

 

[Kynergy]

well let's hear those great and exciting, new,fresh ideas then instead of dumping on everyone else's. that's easy and anyone can do it.

-Bane escapes from prison or
He trains himself while living in Gotham (possibly the Narrows?) his whole life
- He starts out just as the common street thug
- He decides to work with the mob (not as a henchman, as an actual member of the mob)
- He sees Gotham as an easy target, because of all the crime all ready there.
- He enjoys the challenge of Batman, and decides to publicly acknowledge that he will take down Batman and control Gotham (like in Knightfall)
-Maybe he see's how Gotham is falling apart, and decides that he wants a piece of it all for him self - Maybe he feels entitled to control it do to something happening to him in the past?

Those are just some. Maybe they aren't great, but that's why I am not writing the movie. I can almost guarantee you that Nolan will not have Bane trained by Ra's, because he knows that he has already done it, and doesn't want to do it again.

I didn't mean to make you mad, I wasn't trying to get involved with your debate and I wasn't trolling. So sorry if you think I was...but it was just a joke.

Who's unimaginative here? The only conclusion you can surmise from a possible plot point of the LoS training Bane, is -- Batman Begins + Bane?

Really? Talk about thoughtless.

Because the LoS training Bruce was half the movie. Its the same thing, just with Bane instead of Bruce.

 

[The_Raganork]

I disagree. Bruce like everyone else is an amalgam of his experiences. The sum total of his entire life. What defines him is how he reacts to it. How he copes with it. How he channels it. Ra's was a teacher. Just as Joe Chill. Just as Rachel. Just as Gordon. Just as his mother and father and most of all Alfred. They each provide a piece of the puzzle. But what defines him is himself. The choices he makes.

Clearly not in TDK; He was used by Joker, and made choices not based on his experiences but how Joker toyed with him.

I do think Bruce ought to be the sum of his experiences but, that hasn't happened yet.

If he really was going by what Rachel said, he'd have found a way to rectify his life WITH Batman; she INSISTED that he was wrong for what he was doing, that Batman was his life and not Bruce.

If he lived with her experience and her words in mind, he would have chose to save Harvey.

Furthermore; who is Bruce Wayne? He left as a child and was crafted by criminals and then Ra's al Ghul.

He has yet to live a life that is uniquely his own; he lives as a LoS trainee and then as Batman in TDK but, Bruce is missing.

And I knew you'd disagree, its not uncommon. A post that long couldn't have possibly yielded ANYTHING you agree with.

You're unwilling to grant any points to the person your debating with. Stubborn.

 

[Pagan]

Clearly not in TDK; He was used by Joker, and made choices not based on his experiences but how Joker toyed with him.

I do think Bruce ought to be the sum of his experiences but, that hasn't happened yet.

If he really was going by what Rachel said, he'd have found a way to rectify his life WITH Batman; she INSISTED that he was wrong for what he was doing, that Batman was his life and not Bruce.

If he lived with her experience and her words in mind, he would have chose to save Harvey.

Furthermore; who is Bruce Wayne? He left as a child and was crafted by criminals and then Ra's al Ghul.

He has yet to live a life that is uniquely his own; he lives as a LoS trainee and then as Batman in TDK but, Bruce is missing.

And I knew you'd disagree, its not uncommon. A post that long couldn't have possibly yielded ANYTHING you agree with.

You're unwilling to grant any points to the person your debating with. Stubborn.

I'm stubborn? Pot meets kettle?

I do think the decision he made to try to save Rachel first was based on his experience. Particularly the experience of losing a loved one.
As for Rachel being a teacher did she not have him throw the gun away instead of exacting revenge? And everyone is the sum total of all their experiences (unless they have amnesia) whether they've fully accepted their role or not is another thing. That's self realization and acceptance.

 

[The_Raganork]

I know they haven't been in the films. I was just making the point that "strategic genius" is a common trait in a lot of members of Batman's rouges gallery. If they were dummies they wouldn't be much of a challenge.

you're wrong that all of Nolan's villains are independent. Crane worked for/with Ra's

and it's "sufficient" not efficient.

I hate when people do this...I know the English language.

I meant Efficient

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/efficient

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sufficient

I meant the villains perform or function in the best possible manner with the least waste of time and effort on their own

NOT

Self adequate for the purpose; enough

please don't correct my choice of words again, without first knowing what they mean

 

[Pagan]

I hate when people do this...I know the English language.

I meant Efficient

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/efficient

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sufficient

I meant the villains perform or function in the best possible manner with the least waste of time and effort on their own

NOT

Self adequate for the purpose; enough

please don't correct my choice of words again, without first knowing what they mean

wow you just can't admit a mistake either can you. no one uses the phrase "self efficient" just stop digging that hole already.

 

[The_Raganork]

I'm stubborn? Pot meets kettle?

I do think the decision he made to try to save Rachel first was based on his experience. Particularly the experience of losing a loved one.
As for Rachel being a teacher did she not have him throw the gun away instead of exacting revenge? And everyone is the sum total of all their experiences (unless they have amnesia) whether they've fully accepted their role or not is another thing. That's self realization and acceptance.

Uh...except picking Rachel got her killed and turned Harvey into a monster. Isn't he supposed to do what's best for the city? Not himself? I thought that was Batman's purpose.

Doesn't look like he listened to Rachel there when she goes on and on about doing the right thing.

Throwing the gun away? One of the few moments in BB that don't mean anything.

He couldn't shoot Joe Chill...he threw the gun away out of frustration with himself and the situation. You think he did it because Rachel didn't like the gun?

Either way, I'm not arguing he doesn't work from his experiences with others, I'm saying Ra's Al Ghul is his source, he lives his life as Batman following Ra's teaching.

When alfred suggest Joker is complicated Bruce says:

"Criminals aren't complicated"

A direct line Ra's used. His entire basis of being an incorruptible symbol comes from Ra's.

Ra's got him over his fear of Bats.

To deny Ra's Al Ghul is a MAJOR source of Batman's ideology is like skipping all of Batman Begins.

 

[Kynergy]

didn't think you'd see this again did you Kynergy?

I expect to see that atleast once a month until the movie is released

 

[The_Raganork]

wow you just can't admit a mistake either can you. no one uses the phrase "self efficient" just stop digging that hole already.

You know what, forget it...this is off topic.

 

[Pagan]

Uh...except picking Rachel got her killed and turned Harvey into a monster. Isn't he supposed to do what's best for the city? Not himself? I thought that was Batman's purpose.

Doesn't look like he listened to Rachel there when she goes on and on about doing the right thing.

Throwing the gun away? One of the few moments in BB that don't mean anything.

He couldn't shoot Joe Chill...he threw the gun away out of frustration with himself and the situation. You think he did it because Rachel didn't like the gun?

Either way, I'm not arguing he doesn't work from his experiences with others, I'm saying Ra's Al Ghul is his source, he lives his life as Batman following Ra's teaching.

When alfred suggest Joker is complicated Bruce says:

"Criminals aren't complicated"

A direct line Ra's used. His entire basis of being an incorruptible symbol comes from Ra's.

Ra's got him over his fear of Bats.

To deny Ra's Al Ghul is a MAJOR source of Batman's ideology is like skipping all of Batman Begins.

no one denies Ra's had an effect. I said so. But Ra's didn't define him. If Ra's had then he would have served the League.

As for him making the wrong choice. Well that's what happens. No one ever said he was perfect. That he was infallible. That he wasn't a human with emotions. He's not clairvoyant. He's a man. He has vulnerabilities. He's not a machine.

 

[The_Raganork]

no one denies Ra's had an effect. I said so. But Ra's didn't define him. If Ra's had then he would have served the League.

As for him making the wrong choice. Well that's what happens. No one ever said he was perfect. That he was infallible. That he wasn't a human with emotions. He's not clairvoyant. He's a man. He has vulnerabilities. He's not a machine.

Ra's did define him. He strayed from the final part of his teachings. This doesn't mean he totally abandoned Ra's.

If he did, he would be Batman; Batman is a LoS dropout and he delivers justice with an iron fist just like the LoS would.

Doesn't mean he's a slave to Ra's teachings or that he follows them exactly but, her certainly was molded by Ra's.

His entire ideal for Batman is to be "a symbol...incorruptible"

Wasn't Ra's the one who told him in Jail that he could become "A symbol...A legend"?

I mean if that's not the same definition i don't know what is. No doubt Ra's was wrong in BB with his handling of Gotham

But that man was a HUGE defining factor in Bruce Wayne's quest for justice.

 

[KRIM]

Because the LoS training Bruce was half the movie. Its the same thing, just with Bane instead of Bruce.

You didn't explain anything. Never mind that you don't even know what happens in TDKR (though I invite you to try). You've taken a broad plot point and made a blanket statement that doesn't even connect the two films you're talking about in any sufficient manner.

Here, let's play a game:

Joker wrecks havoc in Gotham, while the trio formed by Gordon, Dent, and Batman try to take him down amidst all the chaos. In the meantime, Bruce comes in conflict with his life as a vigilante and one as a citizen. It is tested by his love for another woman, who can't come to terms with his double life. Worse, Joker dares Batman to reveal his true identity, or risk having the city turn on him.

What story did I just describe?

 

[The_Raganork]

You didn't explain anything. Never mind that you don't even know what happens in TDKR (though I invite you to try). You've taken a broad plot point and made a blanket statement that doesn't even connect the two films you're talking about in any sufficient manner.

Here, let's play a game:

Joker wrecks havoc in Gotham, while the trio formed by Gordon, Dent, and Batman try to take him down amidst all the chaos. In the meantime, Bruce comes in conflict with his life as a vigilante and one as a citizen. It is tested by his love for another woman, who can't come to terms with his double life. Worse, Joker dares Batman to reveal his true identity, or risk having the city turn on him.

What story did I just describe?

Except Pagan's idea wasn't some vague notion. It was a BB story with Bane inserted instead of Bruce.

maybe I should have elaborated a bit. You know how Ra's sought Bruce out? He found him in the prison. after he had witnessed his fighting prowess? (His wealth and family history didn't hurt either)

Who's to say he didn't do the same with Bane? What if he got Bane out after hearing of his fighting prowess in the deathmatches? What if he trained him to be a weapon for the LoS? Maybe even an Ubu type bodyguard for Talia?

 

[GrimmReaper7]

Here, let's play a game:

Joker wrecks havoc in Gotham, while the trio formed by Gordon, Dent, and Batman try to take him down amidst all the chaos. In the meantime, Bruce comes in conflict with his life as a vigilante and one as a citizen. It is tested by his love for another woman, who can't come to terms with his double life. Worse, Joker dares Batman to reveal his true identity, or risk having the city turn on him.

What story did I just describe?

I never knew Edward Nigma posted on these threads

 

[KRIM]

Except Pagan's idea wasn't some vague notion. It was a BB story with Bane inserted instead of Bruce.

I'm not talking about Pagan or his ideas. I've directed my statements against the notion that Bane + LoS (training) = Batman Begins. I've seen these generalizations before, and it's as stupid as the first time I read it.

 

[The_Raganork]

I never knew Edward Nigma posted on these threads

I'm not talking about Pagan or his ideas. I've directed my statements against the notion that Bane + LoS (training) = Batman Begins. I've seen these generalizations before, and it's as stupid as the first time I read it.

aha...Gotcha. To be fair Kynergy was also going off of Pagan's post.

 

[Kynergy]

Here, let's play a game:

Joker wrecks havoc in Gotham, while the trio formed by Gordon, Dent, and Batman try to take him down amidst all the chaos. In the meantime, Bruce comes in conflict with his life as a vigilante and one as a citizen. It is tested by his love for another woman, who can't come to terms with his double life. Worse, Joker dares Batman to reveal his true identity, or risk having the city turn on him.

What story did I just describe?

The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight! What do I win.

Never mind that you don't even know what happens in TDKR

I never said I did.

You didn't explain anything. You've taken a broad plot point and made a blanket statement that doesn't even connect the two films you're talking about in any sufficient manner.

But, if Bane was trained by the LoS, how much different could it get from Bruce being trained by the LoS. I'm confused in what your asking me to do. I don't even think your asking me a concrete question. But, if he is trained by the League, then its the same as Bruce. There could be differences...

- Bane wasn't found in prison
- Bane sticks with the League, unlike Bruce
- Bane kills the prisoner, unlike Bruce.

So if he did those things, being trained by the League but listening to everything Ra's says, then he is just like Ra's. And Ra's and Bruce already fought each other, we don't need to see it again. I just don't see any radical differences between Bruce being trained by the LoS and Bane being trained by the LoS.

Does that answer whatever it is your asking me?

 

[KRIM]

The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight! What do I win.

Nothing. I was talking about Tim Burton's Batman.

I never said I did.

By implication you did. You cannot accurate say two stories would be the same, without having in-depth knowledge of what those narratives entail.

But, if Bane was trained by the LoS, how much different could it get from Bruce being trained by the LoS. I'm confused in what your asking me to do. I don't even think your asking me a concrete question. But, if he is trained by the League, then its the same as Bruce. There could be differences...

- Bane wasn't found in prison
- Bane sticks with the League, unlike Bruce
- Bane kills the prisoner, unlike Bruce.

So if he did those things, being trained by the League but listening to everything Ra's says, then he is just like Ra's. And Ra's and Bruce already fought each other, we don't need to see it again. I just don't see any radical differences between Bruce being trained by the LoS and Bane being trained by the LoS.

Does that answer whatever it is your asking me?

Whatever I've asked is rhetorical. There is little to no info about TDKR. A simplified description of one single plot point isn't going to magically manifest itself into a detailed synopsis, and thus you cannot compare it to a fully realized film like Batman Begins. You've made a mountain out of a molehill.

You ask what could possibly be different. The answer is infinite. It is not up to me or you to figure out which direction it would take. Just acknowledge that the possibilities are out there. TDKR could be plot for plot the same exact as BB, but if it deviates at the midway point, guess what? You still end up with a vastly different movie. This is fiction. So the limits are whatever the artist creates.

 

[Fanticon]

yeah i like the idea of an opening with Bats breaking up some kind of criminal act and the cops moving in but not on the criminals but him. With gordon possibly giving him a tip off after a narrow escape with a new task force assigned to catching him.

 

[RedSkull]

I've always liked the idea of an opening scene being Batman stopping a named/familiar criminal or something along those lines. Sort of like what he did with scarecrow in TDK though more intense and drawn out, as obviously scarecrow isn't too much of a threat. Maybe a beginning scene would be a good place to slot in Black Mask

 

[Kynergy]

Nothing. I was talking about Tim Burton's Batman.






By implication you did. You cannot accurate say two stories would be the same, without having in-depth knowledge of what those narratives entail.


Whatever I've asked is rhetorical. There is little to no info about TDKR. A simplified description of one single plot point isn't going to magically manifest itself into a detailed synopsis, and thus you cannot compare it to a fully realized film like Batman Begins. You've made a mountain out of a molehill.

You ask what could possibly be different. The answer is infinite. It is not up to me or you to figure out which direction it would take. Just acknowledge that the possibilities are out there. TDKR could be plot for plot the same exact as BB, but if it deviates at the midway point, guess what? You still end up with a vastly different movie. This is fiction. So the limits are whatever the artist creates.

When I said Bane+LoS=BB, I meant that the origin story of Batman and Bane would be the same, not the entire movie. I'm going to be honest, I was confused and thought that you were in agreement with Pagan and that you believed that the LoS was the only route it could go. I see from your last post, however, that that is not true. So that's my mistake. I completely agree with you and I think that it's impossible to predict what is going to happen, that's how I have always felt about this movie.

In my last post I was just trying to convince you (or atleast I thought) that Ra's training Bane was not the only option and that it could go in many ways. But obviously, you all ready agree with that. So my apologies. We good?