The Dark Knight The “Dark Knight” Debate – Did Batman Need To Fall?

[Mr. Socko]

Public: Who killed those 6 people.
Gordon: I dunno, it wasn't Harvey though.
Public: Was it Batman?
Gordon: No, wasn't Batman either, we're still trying to find out.
Public: How did Harvey die?
Gordon: He slipped on a banana peel and fell out a large building, Batman didn't kill him

 

[Hole Shot]

It was the immediate spur of the moment solution, the cops were coming, Dent was lying there DEAD and the one thing that mattered most was protecting Dent's reputation as a hero to the people of Gotham. Gordon and Batman didn't have time to come up with alibis, Batman just said "I did it, later!"

 

[BatmanFanatic]

I was talking from a third person observer view point not from Batman's viewpoint. Remember, Batman didn't write the script. Nolan did, and he has a plan. In Nolan's Batman trilogy Batman had to fall. If he can't help himself back up how is he ever going to help Gotham get back up again?

Well #1.) When you see the writers grand intention in the film, the film is far too obvious and the writer is not doing a very good job and being behind the scenes where they belong and #2.) I agree Batman should fall at the end of part two of a trio, that is good structure, however he should fall in a logical and believable way. Not in a way which makes him seem rash or foolish or having a death-wish. It should have never been a personal choice in his part - certainly not in a situation where it was entirely unnecessary for him to do so.

 

[BatmanFanatic]

Public: Who killed those 6 people.
Gordon: I dunno, it wasn't Harvey though.
Public: Was it Batman?
Gordon: No, wasn't Batman either, we're still trying to find out.
Public: How did Harvey die?
Gordon: He slipped on a banana peel and fell out a large building, Batman didn't kill him

Gordon: The investigation into these murders is ongoing -
Public: There were murders? Really, we were busy watching American Idol.
Gordon: Yes, Maroni, his driver and a crooked cop were killed.
Public: Sweet! Lets have a party!

 

[BatmanFanatic]

It was the immediate spur of the moment solution, the cops were coming, Dent was lying there DEAD and the one thing that mattered most was protecting Dent's reputation as a hero to the people of Gotham. Gordon and Batman didn't have time to come up with alibis, Batman just said "I did it, later!"

Great, so now he's reckless as well

 

[Yr Blues]

Batman just said "I did it, later!"

That's what makes Batman one badass mother******.

 

[thejon93]

Sweet! Lets have a party!

No.

 

[BatmanFanatic]

No.

You honestly think the public would really CARE who killed a mobster, a mobsters driver, and a crooked cop?

They'd just be happy the bastards stuffed it.

 

[Mr. Socko]

No.

But David Cook just won American Idol!!!

 

[thejon93]

You honestly think the public would really CARE who killed a mobster, a mobsters driver, and a crooked cop?

They'd just be happy the bastards stuffed it.

No... for I'd still be in bed.

 

[screena]

ending was perfect and it made sense for a lot of reasons SOME of you did not even notice:

1. criminals were not afraid of batman anymore, because they knew he does not kill. he HAD to do something about it (without actually kiling someone of course)

2. he owed harvey one, he did the same for him earlier in the movie. also rachel was very upset because of that, so in a way he also did it for rachel.

3. most important: he is the dark knight! it should be obvious that he does not drive around in a car while the crowd applouds him...people hate him, fear him and are afraid of him, thats the way it should be.

 

[CaptainClown]

Yes, Batman needed to fall, because all of Harvey(Two-Face)'s kills were all vigilante style kills. You can't blame that on a crook/criminal, but someone who is a vigilante. The one thing that still bothers me in the grand scheme of things is the female cop who lived who saw Harvey in the flesh, you'd think she'd blab.

Ya more or less.

Also the female cop has proven to be corrupt, so how many people would believe her?

 

[Afrigginhobbit]

Im uhhhh.....guessing you werent too happy with that bit of The Dark Knight, BatmanFanatic?

 

[CaptainClown]

P

You honestly think the public would really CARE who killed a mobster, a mobsters driver, and a crooked cop?

They'd just be happy the bastards stuffed it.

Well with that logic do you think the public would really care Batman is taking the law into his own hands? They actually do, Batman is bringing all this insanity to Gotham. Two-face represents everything that the people of Gotham fear. Someone being judge jury and executioner.

It is like boondock saints ending, while some people agree with those methods there are still a group thatare against it.

 

[mrbrownie]

ending was perfect and it made sense for a lot of reasons SOME of you did not even notice:

1. criminals were not afraid of batman anymore, because they knew he does not kill. he HAD to do something about it (without actually kiling someone of course)

2. he owed harvey one, he did the same for him earlier in the movie. also rachel was very upset because of that, so in a way he also did it for rachel.

3. most important: he is the dark knight! it should be obvious that he does not drive around in a car while the crowd applouds him...people hate him, fear him and are afraid of him, thats the way it should be.

Good post, was about to post this.

Firstly, Batman is already hated almost by all of Gotham. Batman taking the blame on all the murders committed by Two-Face and the death of Harvey, ties all the loose knots on maintaining the good image of Harvey Dent, except by Gordon's family and Ramirez. Which both can be easily solved. Gordon explains to his family the situation and they remain silent. Ramirez doesn't really know what was Two-Face's intentions, and if she does dare to bring the question up, it could be said that Harvey was trying to save Gordon's family from Batman. Batman taking the blame would be perfect, it's what the citizens want and need, he martyrices Harvey Dent as the White Knight who fought for a clean Gotham until death, and confirms Batman as the evil vigilante that almost everyone thinks he is.

 

[Saint]

You honestly think the public would really CARE who killed a mobster, a mobsters driver, and a crooked cop?

The justice system would care. The blame had to go somewhere. Ethically, Batman couldn't frame a living person. Framing a dead person would require them to account for evidence, motive, and so on in ways that simply couldn't be done on the fly. Covering up that Dent did it is a lot simpler than proving a dead mobster did it--the locations of dead mobsters can be accounted for. How could he kill these people if he was over here? Why did he do it? But Batman, nobody knows where Batman is at any given time. Everybody knows he leaves no trace, so the lack of evidence doesn't matter. Saying "I saw Batman do it" is enough. That gives them something to pursue, with with the mentality being that they'll prove or disprove it when Batman is captured. If you say "This dead mobster here did it," you've got to prove it. If you say "Batman did it, let's chase him" you only have to prove it once he's caught. Until then, you only have to make him a viable suspect--which, with Batman, is easy. The best solution was to say "Batman started offing bad guys."

 

[deathfromabove]

saint for the win.

well said sir.

so judging by your sig i take it you loved the movie? you are one of the few on here whose opinion i have been waiting to hear.

as opposed to those who start threads to gloat (told you so locked for the win)

 

[Saint]

The reasoning is not as solid as I'd like, but it's solid enough to pass, I think. Having a reasonable explanation instead of a perfect one is a compromise that sometimes has to be made, in order to serve the themes.

 

[DACrowe]

Well he probably didn't. But at the time they were running short of ideas with the cops closing in and Dent dead (accept it). Ultimately, he did it because he blames himself. Batman thinks Dent was Gotham's true hero and he could have/should have saved Dent if he had stopped Joker earlier (remember the scene after Rachel dies he blames himself) or gotten there quicker to safe half his face. He feels he let Dent down (both figuratively and now literally) and will take the blame, because the city needs that image of a white knight, a martyr, protected and safe. Batman takes the blame because he can and probably because he blames himself (which I imagine will pop up in the next one).

And for those who say "there is no way back without Dent being alive," have such little imagination. AFter all Batman has never been on the wrong side of the law before and came back as a popular hero afterwards.

 

[DACrowe]

Well #1.) When you see the writers grand intention in the film, the film is far too obvious and the writer is not doing a very good job and being behind the scenes where they belong and #2.) I agree Batman should fall at the end of part two of a trio, that is good structure, however he should fall in a logical and believable way. Not in a way which makes him seem rash or foolish or having a death-wish. It should have never been a personal choice in his part - certainly not in a situation where it was entirely unnecessary for him to do so.

1) You shouldn't see a writer's grand intention? You mean like in Empire seeing that Vader being Luke's father is going to play a major role in the next one as he has to accept him as his father and own up to the crimes of his father? Or that the Rebels were going to have to beat the Empire after a crushing defeat? Or Smegal would be a problem in destroying the ring and try to get the hobbits killed? Okay.

2) Who said Nolan's Batman isn't rash? I'd say he is guilty enough that he self-destructive right now if not suicidal. Think about that.

 

[souvlaki]

Yeah people, a few mob deaths, and a cop is one thing, but how the hell do you think Gordon could explain Dent's death? Especially considering he was at the scene of the crime. As was Batman. I mean, there are really only two ways to respond to that situation... put the blame on Harvey, or put the blame on Batman.

 

[Gaara_Abarai]

This is from slashfilm and best sums up why it only a portion and the rest is here http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/07/20/assessing-the-themes-of-the-dark-knight/

The Symbology of Batman

The final monologue that Commissioner Gordon brings the themes from Batman Begins to their logical conclusion: Namely, that as a man, Bruce Wayne’s powers to evil crime are rather limited. As a man, he can be corrupted, he can be killed, and ultimately, he can be defeated. As a symbol he can become far more, and at the end of The Dark Knight, he becomes, to society, an uncontainable force in very much the same way the Joker was. He becomes hunted, making people believe that he cannot be controlled, that he has lost all respect for societal norms and the rule of law. As Gordon realizes he needs to blame the murders on Batman, he acknowledges not only the need for society to push their fears onto something, but their hopes as well (which he allows them to do by preserving Dent’s good name).
In order to keep from tearing itself to shreds, society needs to believe in the incorruptibility of good and the relative remoteness of evil. The Dark Knight points us to ways in which we cope with this need.
Simultaneously, it’s also made clear that, in fact, Batman never succumbs to his own dark, inner urges. In the movie, Bruce Wayne says the line, “I’ve seen what I have to become to fight men like him,” and he rejects the path he has to take to stop Joker, a man who has no rules whatsoever. In one of the more memorable scenes from the film, the two have a showdown in Gotham’s city streets, the Joker manically screaming “Hit me!” as Batman is propelled towards him in the bat pod. As much as Batman wants to annihilate the Joker, he knows he can’t violate his own moral code, and almost sacrifices himself to prevent this from happening (albeit as part of a broader ruse to capture him). Still, Batman doesn’t seek to kill evildoers, but to bring them to justice. The dichotomy that the film sets up between Joker and Batman is one of chaos vs. order. The dichotomy between Joker and Dent is one of good vs. evil…

 

[Raptor2k]

^nice

 

[Godman]

"Couldn’t Gordon blame one of the Jokers dead goons or a mobster or some other person besides Gorham’s hero?"

No... Not without tarnishing Gordon reputation and integrity as a good cop. Manufacturing or planting evidence against a suspect living or dead is something good cops do not do... With Batman taking the "blame" basically it was giving Gordon permission. Basically Batman "confessed" to the crimes and thus that lets Gordon integrity off the hook.

Exactly...He did what Dent did for him

 

[storyteller]

Keep in mind that the 5 people dent killed probably werent random people in the way(we know they werent). People are going to think Batman crossed his no killing rule to take down the bad. Batman sacrifices that for another hope in a good man.