The Dark Knight Rises Should Batman be "the world's greatest detective"?

[hatebox]

With the surveillance system, the end of TDK strongly suggested Batman has crossed a line that may very well be explored in the next film. Batman the Realist is making himself heard above the din of Batman the Idealist.

But frankly, I'm not bothered about him being depicted as the world's greatest detective. I don't even know at what point that would become obvious without it feeling forced. A very, very good detective is enough for me.

 

[ultimatefan]

Plus the world´s greatest detectives these days are teams of forensic scientists, each one with their own expertise, it´s not a one-man job. That concept is almost as fictional as that of the superhero.

 

[KalMart]

Plus...for those who say that he has the advantage of all that technology, and that 'anyone' could figure it out with the same technology......

That's kinda' like saying that anyone with MS Word could write a classic novel, or anyone with FCP/AVID/VegasPro/Adobe Premiere can become a top-level film editor, or if you have a high-end film camera you could be a cinematographer, or anyone with a tool shed could be a master craftsman. They're all just tools...no matter how much of them you have, it's the people using them that determine the results.

 

[The Batman]

If Greg House and the 21st Century version of Sherlock Holmes can look like geniuses in a modern day "Realistic" context, I dont see why itd be hard for Nolan's Batman. In fact, itd be one of the least "out there" aspects of nolans batman

 

[RustyCage]

Plus...for those who say that he has the advantage of all that technology, and that 'anyone' could figure it out with the same technology......

That's kinda' like saying that anyone with MS Word could write a classic novel, or anyone with FCP/AVID/VegasPro/Adobe Premiere can become a top-level film editor, or if you have a high-end film camera you could be a cinematographer, or anyone with a tool shed could be a master craftsman. They're all just tools...no matter how much of them you have, it's the people using them that determine the results.

Well said.

 

[ALP]

Batman hasn't been in a story to call for a showcase of in depth detective work. Would have been the perfect way to showcase his genius had Riddler been in the film but that's not the case.

 

[RustyCage]

Yeah, ALP. That's why the 'Not the Riddler' comment by Nolan was so tragic for me. It seemed like the perfect continuation of Batman's growth into the character we should come to know him as by the end of this trilogy.

Well, we'll see what happens.. Maybe the Riddler is better saved for a Batman with more experience as a detective. Maybe whatever villain is in this film will give him that experience! t:

 

[KalMart]

I think that in these movies....being a detective is just one of several parts that make up what he's trying to be for the city of Gotham. Again, I don't think that other high-level detectives are also trying to make a statement or be a symbol, or trying to make a difference in people's lives and the community like Batman is, and getting their 'hands dirty' as much as Batman is while doing it. Indiana Jones may not be the world's greatest archaeologist...but one could say that the extremes that he goes to certainly puts him at another level amongst his peers....and because of that, he gets results that others in his field couldn't, at least not so quickly.

Maybe I prefer to look at it as he has the potential to be the greatest detective in the world if he decided to just focus on being a detective. But as it stands, there's a bigger war that he's fighting, so he does a lot in less time and space to help him reach his broader goals.

 

[Brother Jack]

Yeah, ALP. That's why the 'Not the Riddler' comment by Nolan was so tragic for me. It seemed like the perfect continuation of Batman's growth into the character we should come to know him as by the end of this trilogy.

It seemed that way to you, but the fact is the story Nolan's telling didn't involve Riddler. I would have liked to see him as well, but it's not fair to be disappointed by it, especially when the story itself is totally unknown.

 

[RustyCage]

It seemed that way to you, but the fact is the story Nolan's telling didn't involve Riddler.

I'm pretty sure my post was confirming that.

I would have liked to see him as well, but it's not fair to be disappointed by it, especially when the story itself is totally unknown.

So because I wanted a villain but didn't know the story, it's not fair for me to be disappointed that the villain I wanted isn't around? I mean, how is it fair that I'm not allowed to mourn the absence of the villain I was hoping for? I don't follow your logic here.

I'm not saying I'm disappointed in the film itself, by the way. There are other villains and stories to be told that I'm amped about the possibilities of. I had just hoped to see Nolan do the Riddler.

Hell, maybe he'll do 4.

 

[RustyCage]

I think that in these movies....being a detective is just one of several parts that make up what he's trying to be for the city of Gotham. Again, I don't think that other high-level detectives are also trying to make a statement or be a symbol, or trying to make a difference in people's lives and the community like Batman is, and getting their 'hands dirty' as much as Batman is while doing it. Indiana Jones may not be the world's greatest archaeologist...but one could say that the extremes that he goes to certainly puts him at another level amongst his peers....and because of that, he gets results that others in his field couldn't, at least not so quickly.

Maybe I prefer to look at it as he has the potential to be the greatest detective in the world if he decided to just focus on being a detective. But as it stands, there's a bigger war that he's fighting, so he does a lot in less time and space to help him reach his broader goals.

That's a really good summary of the situation.

Love the Indiana Jones comparison!

 

[Brother Jack]

So because I wanted a villain but didn't know the story, it's not fair for me to be disappointed that the villain I wanted isn't around? I mean, how is it fair that I'm not allowed to mourn the absence of the villain I was hoping for? I don't follow your logic here.

I'm saying it's unreasonable to be so disappointed when the film doesn't align exactly with your expectations. Like I said I would have liked to see Riddler but I can't be disappointed because I trust Nolan as a story teller and I think there are good reasons why the character isn't in it.

 

[PreK]

I'm saying it's unreasonable to be so disappointed when the film doesn't align exactly with your expectations.

I'm curious then, what are reasonable grounds to be disappointed? What you just described is exactly how disappointment arises. I'm not aware of any other way to arrive there.

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

I've posed this question before but what the hey:

What kind of a scheme could the Riddler have devised that could serve as a worthy "master plan" in light of Joker's antics in TDK?

Riddler's always worked best when he was simply a thorn in Batman's side. He spends most of his time as a thief, albeit one with a fun gimmick.

I never saw Riddler as a deadly enough adversary to close out the trilogy without revamping the character drastically as a John Doe type killer, which is one of the worst ideas ever.

 

[ALP]

This series so far doesn't call for or need Batman to be an uber puzzle solving detective like Sherlock Holmes.

He is the Guardian of Gotham, not it's ultimate solver of riddles, puzzles, and finger print testing. Batman is first and foremost a crime fighter and that is what takes precedent. Always has been. Sure it's cool to see how he solve a complex riddle set by Nygma or see Batman figure out the exact date and time Calendar man will strike next but most of his villains are terrorists of some sort who just need a good ass kicking.

 

[PreK]

There are rarely occasions where Batman needs to be the uber-detective in the comics themselves. Yet it is there. There are always potential avenues to explore that aspect of the character at all times. Whether it is essential to the story or not.

Otherwise it implies it's not a core trait of Bruce. I refuse to subscribe to that position. It's inherent to him, and thus cannot be relegated to a mental switch that is consciously turned on when it is required. That's not how human beings work.

 

[KalMart]

There are rarely occasions where Batman needs to be the uber-detective in the comics themselves. Yet it is there. There are always potential avenues to explore that aspect of the character at all times. Whether it is essential to the story or not.

Otherwise it implies it's not a core trait of Bruce. I refuse to subscribe to that position. It's inherent to him, and thus cannot be relegated to a mental switch that is consciously turned on when it is required. That's not how human beings work.

But in the more condensed/microcosmic format of feature films, things that are more 'realistically' spread out are naturally honed down and surgically delivered. We can indeed imply a high level of skill with just a few examples by how it's weaved in with everything else. We don't have to see details from start-to-finish to get it, and for the most part, we'd rather not if it'll take precious time and space away from getting everything else a movie story has to offer in there as well. If one is saying that the movies have relegated his status of 'world's greatest detective' to being insignificant or unremarkable...I don't really agree. It's just that it hasn't focused on and expanded upon it like you can in comics. And honestly, I don't think it needs to in order to portray it as an essential (and highly developed) aspect of the character. He's clearly at a higher level than anyone else that's even implied in the films...and not just because of his tools. And since we accept the reality and plausibility of what's presented to us within its own envelope, we don't have to go so far as to rate it against to our real-world standards, or any other that doesn't have just 2+ hours at a time to get a big story across with a lot of other elements to boot.

Is this Batman the world's greatest detective? From the looks of it, he certainly is in THAT world. Now....that wouldn't be saying much if that world was populated primarily by idiots, but I don't see that as being the case. Yes, perhaps a story that's more dedicated to following a detective being a detective would allow more focus on it. But I dunno.....I kinda' like the elements of social anarchy, terrorism, police and corporate corruption, and everything else that's thrown in the mix as well.

 

[ultimatefan]

Plus...for those who say that he has the advantage of all that technology, and that 'anyone' could figure it out with the same technology......

That's kinda' like saying that anyone with MS Word could write a classic novel, or anyone with FCP/AVID/VegasPro/Adobe Premiere can become a top-level film editor, or if you have a high-end film camera you could be a cinematographer, or anyone with a tool shed could be a master craftsman. They're all just tools...no matter how much of them you have, it's the people using them that determine the results.

Exactly, Batman had the technology to figure out what to do with that bullet from the crime scene in TDK, but he had to know what he was looking for, how he could use the technology to obtain the data, and how to cross-reference it with police data to get to the suspect.

 

[PreK]

But in the more condensed/microcosmic format of feature films, things that are more 'realistically' spread out are naturally honed down and surgically delivered. We can indeed imply a high level of skill with just a few examples by how it's weaved in with everything else. We don't have to see details from start-to-finish to get it, and for the most part, we'd rather not if it'll take precious time and space away from getting everything else a movie story has to offer in there as well.

I can't possibly see how showcasing one of Bats' greatest traits is taking away precious time. One, a competent writer would weave it into the story instead of breaking it up. Two, it doesn't actually take that much time to develop. We're talking under 10 minutes here. In a 2 hours plus movie? Doesn't seem much at all.

If one is saying that the movies have relegated his status of 'world's greatest detective' to being insignificant or unremarkable...I don't really agree. It's just that it hasn't focused on and expanded upon it like you can in comics.

No, I'm saying the notion that you need a specific narrative to depict it, would be relegating it as relatively insignificant to how the character functions. If it's inherent to Batman (which it is in the comics), it works independent of the story being written.

Is this Batman the world's greatest detective? From the looks of it, he certainly is in THAT world. Now....that wouldn't be saying much if that world was populated primarily by idiots, but I don't see that as being the case.

Well, we haven't really seen anyone challenge him in that department. Lucius is the only other smart one in the movies. Everyone else is just... there. It's not highlighted so we can only assume others are of normal intellect.

 

[KalMart]

I can't possibly see how showcasing one of Bats' greatest traits is taking away precious time. One, a competent writer would weave it into the story instead of breaking it up. Two, it doesn't actually take that much time to develop. We're talking under 10 minutes here. In a 2 hours plus movie? Doesn't seem much at all.

I think it's been 'showcased' quite well...but perhaps not to the extent that you'd want to focus on it.

No, I'm saying the notion that you need a specific narrative to depict it, would be relegating it as relatively insignificant to how the character functions. If it's inherent to Batman (which it is in the comics), it works independent of the story being written.

Again, I think you're more focused on quantity rather than quality regarding what we've seen. But I can understand if you'd want even more from what actually was there. I still don't feel it undermined or short-changed how good of a Batman story/character ended up on screen.

Well, we haven't really seen anyone challenge him in that department. Lucius is the only other smart one in the movies. Everyone else is just... there. It's not highlighted so we can only assume others are of normal intellect.

Well by that measure, we'll also need to see specific examples of how good the rest of that world's detectives are to accurately place Batman. Either that, or it just wasn't enough of a detective story for you. But to me, hte overall combination of things that were in it overcomes that alleged particular shortcoming.

 

[ALP]

Quite agreed, Kalmart. This is a film and they have to insert the essentials the best they can. Sure Batman is a detective, but they can't give that the primary focus of the film when it's not called for in the story. Like in Iron Man, Tony Stark is a genius industrialist. In the film we only see the essentials, him building the field generator for his heart and designing the iron suit. It's enough to get the point across.

 

[KalMart]

Quite agreed, Kalmart. This is a film and they have to insert the essentials the best they can. Sure Batman is a detective, but they can't give that the primary focus of the film when it's not called for in the story. Like in Iron Man, Tony Stark is a genius industrialist. In the film we only see the essentials, him building the field generator for his heart and designing the iron suit. It's enough to get the point across.

Yeah, but to be fair...if that part is really important to someone, then I can kinda' see how it was a bit too condensed for their liking. I just feel that if that's the case, it made up for it in other areas. So there's a little element of getting a foot, then wanting a yard, so to speak.

 

[PreK]

I think it's been 'showcased' quite well...but perhaps not to the extent that you'd want to focus on it.

I'm just saying, it couldn't hurt to delve into it a bit more. I'm not convinced it's somehow detrimental in any way shape or form, since it's -- well, part of the character.

Again, I think you're more focused on quantity rather than quality regarding what we've seen. But I can understand if you'd want even more from what actually was there. I still don't feel it undermined or short-changed how good of a Batman story/character ended up on screen.

I'm actually not referring to anything in particular. Just speaking concept-wise; if you can't universally apply an aspect of a character's function, evidently it isn't so essential.

Well by that measure, we'll also need to see specific examples of how good the rest of that world's detectives are to accurately place Batman.

It doesn't need to get into such a limited subsection of the population. You just need a bar of comparison to gauge performance.

In a room full of 7 footers, the word 'tall' doesn't exist.

 

[ALP]

In a room full of 7 footers, the word 'tall' doesn't exist.

It does when Warwick Davis enters.

 

[PreK]

You may have missed the point.