Excellent post, milost. Kudos to you!
t:
Ah, Breaking Bad. "Masterpiece" cannot even begin to describe that show. I miss it already.
BatLobsterRises, since you comprised an analogy related to TDKR's ending, allow me to do the same:
Batman Beyond. I like to call it the show that did the impossible: managing to beautifully blend the idea that Bruce Wayne is the true Batman with the idea that "Batman" can be passed on from generation to a generation.
First, they come up with a very believable reason to why someone as obsessed as Bruce Wayne would quit Batman - having to resort to using a gun.
But it doesn't end there. Throughout the course of the series, the whole theme of "Bruce Wayne is the true Batman" is presented and attacked by Bruce Timm straight on. We see how Terry deals with it, how Bruce deal with it now that someone else is in the batsuit, and how the villains and supporting cast react to it. We see Terry undergo a character arc regarding that whole theme, which concludes in "Return of the Joker" and "Epilogue" (JLU). Eventually it takes it even a step further by showing us how Terry deals with the concept of Robin and states what differentiates him from not only Bruce, but also the Robins.
"But when you're creating a Batman, genetics and background are only one component. The rest is tragedy."
JLU expands on BB even more by displaying the darker side of there being a next Batman.
That's where Amanda Waller steps in. She is so impressed by Batman's indomitable will that the "Bruce Wayne is the true Batman" message begins to horrify her - because she knows Bruce won't be around forever. You once said you're not fully fond of the "only Bruce can be
the Batman" approach because you find it tragic, essentially for the same reason why Amanda Waller finds it the same. Whether you know it or not, you (and every other Batman fan watching) share the same fear she does and that is what makes her sympathetic.
And through that sympathy comes the Walter White angle. The angle in which we have a villain committing all these horrible things, but for good reasons. We don't condone their actions, but we understand where they're coming from and we relate to them.
That being said, we begin to see how far Amanda Waller is willing to go and how dirty she is willing to get her hands just to create another Batman. This is where Bruce Timm shows how much work it takes, including all the dirty work that comes with it. Any decent human being would find Amanda Waller's "Project Batman Beyond" absolutely disgusting.
She gets to a point where she realizes her mistakes and that her project goes against everything Bruce stood for, which is why she pulls the plug on it. Unfortunately it was too late by then because Terry was already on the path towards Batman, a regret she had to live with her whole life. That is the case until she finally meets Terry, where she finally gets some closure and forgives herself.
What's the moral of the story? Not that TDKR should have been Batman Beyond 2.0, but that you
can have the best of both worlds. You can have Bruce pass on the mantle to a new generation if you know how to play with the idea and to properly incorporate it with the "Bruce is the one true Batman" idea. Heck, in some ways, these things can even
compliment each other as shown by Bruce Timm. That was the main thing that made Batman Beyond work. It was a concept that shouldn't have worked on any level and yet it worked on
all the levels.
Ignoring the continuity part of the argument, I think a lot more people would have been much more open to the idea of Batman being a generational mantle had they addressed both the bright
and dark side of the idea, as Batman Beyond did. However, TDKR never did. The passing of the torch is too "happy" with the film acting as if Bruce just passed on the mantle of Superman or Captain America. "Hey kids, you can be a kick-ash hero too!" is what it feels like more than the more realistic, grey-shaded, and more complex angle that should be present in Batman.
Another mistake TDKR's ending made is dumbing down the complex psychology behind Batman IMO. It makes it seem that that Bruce getting over Batman is easy and no big deal, since he just gets over it with no professional therapy whatsoever, which is what I would expect to "kill" something as larger-than-life as Batman that is so bonded to Bruce's (psychological) roots. Furthermore, it takes it a step further with the idea that Bruce and John Blake are the same because they're orphans. Is that really what Batman is all about? Is Batman just the byproduct of a kid yelling for mommy and daddy? I find that to be a very surface and black-and-white view of Batman's psychology and as you told milost, things aren't that black-and-white (which I agree with). Not all orphans are mentally disturbed;
very few orphans become orphans in the first place in the same radical way Bruce became one.
Going back to Batman Beyond, Terry was also psychologically disturbed but due to reasons having nothing to do with being an orphan. Bruce and Terry both get a happy ending in
Epilogue. Bruce gets to leave a somewhat quiet life despite not being too far from Batman (with Terry being Batman), gains the family/allies he pushed away twice throughout his life back, and kinda-sorta comes to the conclusion that his journey was never alone (though we could have gotten better in his head IMO). Terry is also at peace (with him soon proposing to Dana and all), which kinda ends his growth in BB. Batman will continue to exist despite Bruce being in his final days. Despite all the dark things in both of their lives, the ending is somewhat happy and satisfying. It isn't the complete "Bruce retires in Italy with a hot chick" type of happy ending, but it is satisfying nonetheless.
Again, not saying Nolan should have made Batman Beyond 2.0. Just stating that everyone - both Nolan and all types of fans - could have had their cakes and eat it too.
