The Dark Knight Rises TDKR SPOILERS (read at your own risk) - Part 3

[m1000be]

Spoiler

It doesn't seem out of place for Robin / Blake to take on the mantle. The Batman is suppose to be a symbol of hope. One that will inspire people. It makes sense for Blake to take this mantle and keep it going. If he goes his own path, then he has to start completely from scratch and get Gotham behind him. If he simply takes up the mantle, then Gotham has its Dark Knight, it's symbol of hope. Not to mention, it adds to the character. They already idolize him for saving the city. But imagine how they would feel if he reappears out of nowhere, again, when the city needs him? That's what Blake can do with the mantle. He can make The Batman reappear when the city needs hope the most. Driving the point home that The Batman is hope. .. With his own path / new outfit / new alter ego, he can't do that.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

You can take up the mantle without being Batman. Batman has accomplished his goal.

 

[m1000be]

You can take up the mantle without being Batman. Batman has accomplished his goal.

You're missing the point tho. Batman is not a man. He is a symbol. A symbol that will be passed down and taken over. A guardian of Gotham. It's bigger than one man. Bruce realized this.

 

[CConn]

I took the

Spoiler

Bat symbol repair to mean the exact same thing the cafe scene and the auto pilot fix being made know to mean. They were all little nods to the important people in Bruce's life, to let them know that he was alive and ok. That is why Alfred, Gordon and Lucius all got that moment.

But Batman is gone, just like Bruce is gone.

No, he really isn't.

Spoiler

As its been said 80 million times in the Nolan movies, Batman is a symbol, not a man. To be preaching that line for three entire movies, then have Batman end to pay "respect" to Bruce Wayne would be a complete philosophical 180 that would make very little sense.

Not to mention, it wouldn't at all be financially sensible for WB. Whar's gonna make more, a Batman movie or a Robin movie? ...yeah.

Also...

Spoiler

Let's remember, Blake now has like two dozen 12yos living right above the cave. If they were going to do Robin, it'd make much more sense that Blake would pick one of them - given his close association with them - rather than become Robin himself.

Hell, we already saw him utilizing the kids in an almost tactical way in TDKR. The foreshadowing is there.

 

[CConn]

You can take up the mantle without being Batman. Batman has accomplished his goal.

Batman is a symbol.

Literally. A bat shaped symbol.

There's not much wiggle room there.

 

[Ironhorse75]

Spoiler

He lived. Plain and simple. The worst part of it isn't the fact he lived. It's the whole quinky-dink that Alfred and him go to the same exact cafe at the same exact date and time. We are lead to believe that Alfred buries him, gives a heart breaking speech. Moves on, goes to a cafe and behold! There is Bruce and Selina at the same date and time. And all that happens is a ...nod? Alfred has thought of Bruce as a son for his entire life and he just buried him. Would he simply NOD to him? I don't think so.

Spoiler

It's what Alfred wanted. He even said that he wouldn't approach Bruce had that happened when he initally left.

Also, I don't think it was pure coincidence, that would be silly. Alfred was like a father, he probably kept tabs on him. He received word of the vacation and most likely made it a point to be seen.

 

[Yurka]

Spoiler

It doesn't seem out of place for Robin / Blake to take on the mantle. The Batman is suppose to be a symbol of hope. One that will inspire people. It makes sense for Blake to take this mantle and keep it going. If he goes his own path, then he has to start completely from scratch and get Gotham behind him. If he simply takes up the mantle, then Gotham has its Dark Knight, it's symbol of hope. Not to mention, it adds to the character. They already idolize him for saving the city. But imagine how they would feel if he reappears out of nowhere, again, when the city needs him? That's what Blake can do with the mantle. He can make The Batman reappear when the city needs hope the most. Driving the point home that The Batman is hope. .. With his own path / new outfit / new alter ego, he can't do that.

I agree, and I have no problem at all with that, I do have a problem with the [BLACKOUT] Robin reference [/BLACKOUT] though. It doesn't seem necessary at all. I'm not a fan of this ambiguous ending.

 

[joker1524]

Im starting to think that alfred seeing bruce at the cafe was all in alfreds mind lol but then the auto pilot thing comes into play

 

[CConn]

I took the

Spoiler

Bat symbol repair to mean the exact same thing the cafe scene and the auto pilot fix being made know to mean. They were all little nods to the important people in Bruce's life, to let them know that he was alive and ok. That is why Alfred, Gordon and Lucius all got that moment.

But Batman is gone, just like Bruce is gone.

Spoiler

Also, it doesn't make sense that the bat symbol repair would be to let Gordon know that he was alive because, well, Gordon really wasn't at all emotionally invested in Batman as a person. He said as much multiple times. Like Bruce himself, Gordon was more concerned with what Batman represented as a symbol.

Also, I didn't think the auto pilot fix wasn't made to let Lucius know he was alive. He just fixed it so he could, y'know, not die.

Besides, having each of his little "presents" just contain the same message is much too basic. It makes much more sense that they would be tailored to suit each individual person. For Alfred, it was to who that he was alive, for Blake, it was to give his life new meaning, and for Gordon, it was to show that the Batman - the symbol - would be back.

 

[m1000be]

Spoiler

It's what Alfred wanted. He even said that he wouldn't approach Bruce had that happened when he initally left.

Also, I don't think it was pure coincidence, that would be silly. Alfred was like a father, he probably kept tabs on him. He received word of the vacation and most likely made it a point to be seen.

Spoiler

And you're probably right, but the way it is handled is poorly done. In fact, it's a common problem through out the entire movie. Characters just appear and disappear out of nowhere. One minute there are somewhere and in two seconds, somewhere else. Why was Batman on the roof top when he met Catwoman the first time? It's never explained. How did Bruce get from the prison to Gotham? In fact, how did he even get on Gotham? The city was closed off! Where did Alfred go while the city was under siege? Did anything happen to Wayne Manor? It's within city limits, as indicated in The Dark Knight.

The entire movie relies on a bunch of coincidences and it hurts the film.

 

[jimbean]

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

[Art Damage]

Spoiler

for Gordon, it was to show that the Batman - the symbol - would be back.

Well....

[BLACKOUT]I don't quite follow this...it's not like it's assumed there'd be more Batmen[/BLACKOUT]

 

[CConn]

Spoiler

And you're probably right, but the way it is handled is poorly done. In fact, it's a common problem through out the entire movie. Characters just appear and disappear out of nowhere. One minute there are somewhere and in two seconds, somewhere else. Why was Batman on the roof top when he met Catwoman the first time? It's never explained.

Spoiler

Because he was on patrol, obviously.

How did Bruce get from the prison to Gotham?

Because he's Batman. He had already circumvented the world once without any money or identity. He kinda has experience in it.

In fact, how did he even get on Gotham?

Again, Batman. I really don't see why you'd need this to be explained. It would just be boring to have a scene dedicated to explaining it.

The city was closed off! Where did Alfred go while the city was under siege? Did anything happen to Wayne Manor? It's within city limits, as indicated in The Dark Knight.

Its in city limits, but it's not on the island. That's a pretty well known fact.

[/QUOTE]

 

[m1000be]

Spoiler

Son'a'*****. No pearls.
But still , why would Alfred imagine him with Selina of all people?

 

[CConn]

Well....

[BLACKOUT]I don't quite follow this...it's not like it's assumed there'd be more Batmen[/BLACKOUT]

Spoiler

Huh? Gordon doesn't necessarily need to know who/what Batman's return will bring. Just that it will continue.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

No, he really isn't.

Spoiler

As its been said 80 million times in the Nolan movies, Batman is a symbol, not a man. To be preaching that line for three entire movies, then have Batman end to pay "respect" to Bruce Wayne would be a complete philosophical 180 that would make very little sense.

Not to mention, it wouldn't at all be financially sensible for WB. Whar's gonna make more, a Batman movie or a Robin movie? ...yeah.

Also...

Spoiler

Let's remember, Blake now has like two dozen 12yos living right above the cave. If they were going to do Robin, it'd make much more sense that Blake would pick one of them - given his close association with them - rather than become Robin himself.

Hell, we already saw him utilizing the kids in an almost tactical way in TDKR. The foreshadowing is there.

Batman as a symbol has accomplished his goals.

Spoiler

That is why there is a statue, that is why there is someone to take up his cause now that he is gone. Blake will now become his own symbol.

And I seriously doubt there is going to be another Batman movie in this continuity, so it really doesn't matter if Blake is Batman or Robin.

Spoiler

Also, it doesn't make sense that the bat symbol repair would be to let Gordon know that he was alive because, well, Gordon really wasn't at all emotionally invested in Batman as a person. He said as much multiple times. Like Bruce himself, Gordon was more concerned with what Batman represented as a symbol.

Also, I didn't think the auto pilot fix wasn't made to let Lucius know he was alive. He just fixed it so he could, y'know, not die.

Besides, having each of his little "presents" just contain the same message is much too basic. It makes much more sense that they would be tailored to suit each individual person. For Alfred, it was to who that he was alive, for Blake, it was to give his life new meaning, and for Gordon, it was to show that the Batman - the symbol - would be back.

And that is where you are so wrong, completely.

Spoiler

Gordon calls Batman a friend in the film. When he is crying to Blake when Bane is reading the letter, he emphasizes it. Batman was his comrade, his friend, the one who was there and then was gone. That is why what he was forced to do, hid the truth, hurt him so much. It is why he wanted to clear Batman's name. It is why Bruce willing told him who he was. They went past being co-workers, to being true friends. The man saved his son and his city. He seemingly took it worse then his own wife leaving him. He cared deeply for the man behind the mask.

And you do realize that Bruce fixed his auto pilot on his ship, and then made sure to leave a trace at Applied Sciences right? There was no need to do so, other then to let Lucius know he was ok.

 

[Yurka]

Spoiler

Why reference Robin if it's Batman that "lives" on?

Why Why Why Why?

It feels so out of place and unnecessary to me.

 

[eal2727]

I think

Spoiler

Bruce picked that cafe on purpose knowing he'd see Alfred there eventually. Alfred was pretty specific about what cafe it was when he told Bruce that he used to search for him. He said something about it being right along a certain river in Florence, I think. To me, that didn't seem at all problematic. Just my opinion. As I said before, the only thing I really felt was not done well was the idea that Blake just figured out he was Batman. I have no problem with the fact that Bane knew. At some point, with the League of Shadows connections, he and Talia could have figured it out. He figures it out in the comics, because Bane is supposed to be brilliant, like Bruce.

 

[Meerski]

All good points, and good job on bringing up the auto-pilot being fixed. When I first saw the film, I took it as meaning that Bruce sacrificed himself even though he didnt have to.

But now that you mention it, that would give him a way out of getting killed by the nuke, although then again it brings up the question how the hell would he have gotten far enough away from it to survive? Especially considering they showed him still in the Bat with the clock around the 10 second mark.

Yes. But that that's the beauty of hollywood. It doesn't matter how long it needs to take. It's a movie.
If we looked at all this stuff and said "if it were real life" the movie would make no sense what so ever you can't pick an choose what scenes have to be real in a batman movie.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Spoiler

Why reference Robin if it's Batman that "lives" on?

Why Why Why Why?

It feels so out of place and unnecessary to me.

Spoiler

Batman will live on, forever. But through Robin and his fellow successors. He accomplished the immorality Ra's couldn't.

 

[eal2727]

Meerski is exactly right. I mean, I think we all want some realism in a film that aims to be realistic as Nolan's does. But there is a limit. The concept of Batman alone could never happen. Someone would figure it out. He'd make a mistake and get caught by 1,000 cops following him at some point. But I think the point is that terrorism and evil are real, and Batman symbolizes the difference one person can make. It's an allegory. It's not about having everything be realistic. It can't ever be.

 

[Meerski]

First off - why do we use spoiler tags in the spoiler forum / threads?

Second..

Spoiler

It's obvious Bruce is alive. I know some of you guys want to think Nolan went out on a limb and created an Inception type of ending, but he didn't. The auto-pilot was fixed and the most damning evidence of Bruce being alive is the pearls. He took them back from Selina and at the end she is at the diner, wearing them with Bruce sitting there. First off, Alfred wouldn't of imagined Selina wearing the pearls (did he even know Bruce got them back? Did he know Selina was Catwoman? It never says). Second, the pearls were missing from the manifest. It's obvious Bruce faked his death and the death of Batman, because he had moved on. The city was saved and it did inspire people. Blake was the shining example of this. Through out the movie, Bruce even gives tips to Blake on how to take up the mantle.

He lived. Plain and simple. The worst part of it isn't the fact he lived. It's the whole quinky-dink that Alfred and him go to the same exact cafe at the same exact date and time. We are lead to believe that Alfred buries him, gives a heart breaking speech. Moves on, goes to a cafe and behold! There is Bruce and Selina at the same date and time. And all that happens is a ...nod? Alfred has thought of Bruce as a son for his entire life and he just buried him. Would he simply NOD to him? I don't think so. So, it isn't the fact that Bruce is alive that's off. It's how him being alive is handled for the other characters.

You need to watch the movie again and listen to Alfred's speech when he talks about seeing Bruce at te cafe and how he would feel if they saw each other.

 

[Yurka]

Spoiler

Batman will live on, forever. But through Robin and his fellow successors. He accomplished the immorality Ra's couldn't.

Spoiler

I get that, but Robin =/= Batman, and it was pretty heavily implied that Batman could be anyone and could essentially live forever. Why not just be John Blake? Why does he have to be Robin?

 

[m1000be]

Spoiler

Batman will live on, forever. But through Robin and his fellow successors. He accomplished the immorality Ra's couldn't.

Spoiler

Depending on how you view it, in some ways he just followed the LoS. We are lead to believe in Begins that Ducard took the mantle of Ra's, after the explosion. That it was simply a title. A symbol.

 

[Schlosser85]

Ducard did not take the mantle of Ra's, Ducard was Ra's all along, with the other man as a decoy.