I just want to reiterate that on my end it's not solely about Nolan's Bruce lining up with the comics. It's about TDKR Bruce taking 8 years off not lIning up - to me - with BB and TDK Bruce. I'm more than open to interpretations of the character outside the comics, which diverge wildly anyhow.
I would say, though, that a character becomes iconic for a very specific and core reason, and in my estimation the reason Batman resonates is because he doesn't quit- he can't.
With that aside, the Nolan films show a Batman willing to be the outsider, make the hard choices (this is all great). I know there's a lot of focus by this Bruce and the symbol he created. That's true of every Batman. But I still felt at the core, the struggle of BB and TDK was the fact that he NEEDED to be Batman for himself just as much as for Gotham. By starting this film with Bruce having dropped the cowl, that dramatic tension is dismissed outright.
And regardless of whether he misses being Batman, or not being Batman is taking a toll on him, it still undermines that question.
If the goal is for Bruce to find peace internally, I'm totally down with it. But that can be done, and I would argue more effectively so, without having him retiring so easily in the first place. Much more compelling for me if he has literally spent eight years hunted, physically and emotionally destroyed.
And it's be just as true to what Nolan has set out to do. It would take nothing away from the journey Nolan wants to put him on. In fact, it would add to it.
Having him quit detracts from the character, as established over the previous two movies and blunts it's most effective arc, in my view. Has nothing to do with the comics.
I will likely still enjoy the picture. But it's a valid criticism, as far as I'm concerned.
t:
