The Dark Knight Rises The TDKR General Discussion Thread - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 149

[Travesty]

Such a great idea for the movie, when BB cramed it down our throats that Bruce needed to conquer his fears.

 

[JackWhite]

Such a great idea for the movie, when BB cramed it down our throats that Bruce needed to conquer his fears.

I actually really liked that idea in the film. A very "full circle" moment; having Bruce let fear back into his heart in order to conquer the pit.

 

[shauner111]

It's an awesome idea for the movie. Best thing about it for me. It's Bruce becoming Batman in Begins. In Rises he has to become Bruce Wayne again. The last time he was happy was when he was a child, like anybody he had fear. He had become so numb to fear over the years. So as an adult, in order for him to return to that child he was, he needs to find a way to let that fear back in. And that's how he's able to move on from the fearless creature that is Batman.

Goyer said they treated the Batman like it was an addiction for Bruce, and it was time to win the battle over that addiction. Escaping the pit the way he did + what he does at the end of the movie is how he wins the battle. But Batman had become such a symbol in the process so he needed to find a way to continue living life free of Batman while still making sure that it lives on.

That's why it's a perfect ending in my opinion.

 

[JackWhite]

It's an awesome idea for the movie. Best thing about it for me. It's Bruce becoming Batman in Begins. In Rises he has to become Bruce Wayne again. The last time he was happy was when he was a child, like anybody he had fear. He had become so numb to fear over the years. So as an adult, in order for him to return to that child he was, he needs to find a way to let that fear back in. And that's how he's able to move on from the fearless creature that is Batman.

Goyer said they treated the Batman like it was an addiction for Bruce, and it was time to win the battle over that addiction. Escaping the pit the way he did + what he does at the end of the movie is how he wins the battle. But Batman had become such a symbol in the process so he needed to find a way to continue living life free of Batman while still making sure that it lives on.

That's why it's a perfect ending in my opinion.

Very much agreed.

 

[Green Goblin]

What about the suicide squad post credits scene from Origins?

 

[A Necessary Evil]

What about it?

 

[Green Goblin]

What about it?

Could that be a future game WB are making?

 

[Rockbottom]

I watched it the other day again. I do love the film but for some reason that ending just doesn't sit well with me. I get why they did everything and Bruce got his some what happy ending but I've always hated the idea of someone else being Batman. I don't think the ending is wrong, I think its just that my mental image of Batman never lets go or retires until he is forced to so I don't blame Nolan or think he messed it up, it just doesn't really gel with my version of Batman.

I think the films really underrated though by the fandom these days.

 

[Brother Jack]

I watched it the other day again. I do love the film but for some reason that ending just doesn't sit well with me. I get why they did everything and Bruce got his some what happy ending but I've always hated the idea of someone else being Batman. I don't think the ending is wrong, I think its just that my mental image of Batman never lets go or retires until he is forced to so I don't blame Nolan or think he messed it up, it just doesn't really gel with my version of Batman.

I think the films really underrated though by the fandom these days.

I understand that sentiment. In my mind Bruce will always be Batman, no matter how good Terry McGuiness or Grayson are in the role. But the fact of the matter is that Bruce isn't always Batman. It must continue after him. That's the whole implicit reasoning behind Robin as a character, that he is to be the eventual successor to Batman after Bruce is finished. That's why the passing of the torch works as an ending rather than as the entire story.

 

[Visceral]

I watched it the other day again. I do love the film but for some reason that ending just doesn't sit well with me. I get why they did everything and Bruce got his some what happy ending but I've always hated the idea of someone else being Batman. I don't think the ending is wrong, I think its just that my mental image of Batman never lets go or retires until he is forced to so I don't blame Nolan or think he messed it up, it just doesn't really gel with my version of Batman.

I think the films really underrated though by the fandom these days.

Right. To you he never gets over the addiction. Frank Miller would agree with you.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I agree. He's a psychologically broken individual. Batman isn't just a mask he wears, he IS Batman.

 

[SheikhooMan]

Finally the truth about how Bruce got from the Lazarus pit to Gotham so fast has been revealed

[YT]9EmOhy2qSug[/YT]

 

[Shikamaru]

I understand that sentiment. In my mind Bruce will always be Batman, no matter how good Terry McGuiness or Grayson are in the role. But the fact of the matter is that Bruce isn't always Batman. It must continue after him. That's the whole implicit reasoning behind Robin as a character, that he is to be the eventual successor to Batman after Bruce is finished. That's why the passing of the torch works as an ending rather than as the entire story.

The whole reasoning behind Robin as a character is that Batman must have a lighthearted partner by his side to keep him from going that dark path and becoming the Punisher. Batman needs Robin as much as Robin needs Batman.

 

[shauner111]

Batman shouldn't need some lighthearted child to keep him from becoming the punisher. He should be able to control himself. And training a child to fight crime has always been a stupid idea anyway. The main idea for Robin was to have a lighthearted sidekick that can lure more kids in to read their comics. As it progressed the reasons became about what you said Shika AND for Batman to train and prepare the person who would eventually replace him. Which of course has happened, but only temporarily. And we already know the reasons for that.

 

[shauner111]

Finally the truth about how Bruce got from the Lazarus pit to Gotham so fast has been revealed

[YT]9EmOhy2qSug[/YT]

This was said in another thread when they posted the same video, and it's exactly what ive been trying to say over the last year and a half...

Originally Posted by shallbecomeabat
Cannot believe that people still ***** about that.
Seriously, thats like saying you want to see how he does his vanishing act. He is Batman, it does not matter.

Also, is it so hard to believe that the guy who roamed the world without any money for 7 years would have a problem with sneaking aboard of some plane or ship and then ninja stealth himself back into Gotham? I mean, he is a ninja. He is Batman. Its not a plot hole.

Sometimes I really loose faith in the audience these days.

Just because Nolan has plenty of exposition, doesn't mean that every single thing in his movies need it. Nolan likes to balance exposition, with having scenes that also leave it entirely up to the imagination. It's not just black or white with him. And so the fans shouldn't expect it to be.

 

[Shikamaru]

Batman shouldn't need some lighthearted child to keep him from becoming the punisher. He should be able to control himself. And training a child to fight crime has always been a stupid idea anyway. The main idea for Robin was to have a lighthearted sidekick that can lure more kids in to read their comics. As it progressed the reasons became about what you said Shika AND for Batman to train and prepare the person who would eventually replace him. Which of course has happened, but only temporarily. And we already know the reasons for that.

It's not about not having self control. It's about having that family dynamic there to keep him more humanized and psychologically happy/healthy. Bruce doesn't have much of an family (past Alfred), so he brings other people into his Batman life.

Your proposed theory makes no sense. Even if we were to ignore the fact that Bruce doesn't want any of his sons to end up like him by going the path of Batman, it still doesn't make any logical sense. Let's say Bruce retires at 60. It's a realistic age for people to retire at, especially with someone as obsessed with their "job" as Bruce. Usually there's about a 15-20 age gap between Bruce/Dick and a 5-10 age gap between Dick/Tim. What you're suggesting is that, after at least 40 years of being Batman, Bruce wants the 40-45 year old Dick Grayson to take over the mantle when he retires and be Batman for barely-if-not-even half the time he was Batman, followed by the 50-55 year old Tim Drake taking the mantle over after that and being Batman for a decade max - a fraction of the time Bruce and Dick were Batman. Yup. That makes perfect logical sense.

Plus, it's not like Bruce forced any of the Robins to become Robin. They're the ones who sought the training. They're the ones that wanted the job. Bruce just gave them what they were seeking. Once they grew up, they were free to do whatever they wanted. They were their own men. They could go be Nightwing, move to a different city, quit crimefighting altogether, etc. It's why Bruce didn't want Dick to take over the Batman mantle in Knightfall. "He is his own man." They don't live in the shadow of Batman any longer (even though they do in real life ).

The only Robin you could argue Bruce "forced" to be Robin was Jason (with the hopes of reforming him into a better person). Ironically, he is also the Robin who died and later became the least worthy son to carry Batman's legacy.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Well said, Shika. And I actually never made that connection with Jason... very interesting.

 

[shauner111]

you have a point but i still dont like it. It's irresponsible of Bruce to let a child go out like that. I just dont like it personally. I prefer Batman on his own. There's other reasons as to why i dont think Robin should be there, especially that young but..

Check the "Robin or no Robin" thread in the Future Batman Movies section. We have that debate over there.

 

[Shikamaru]

Honestly, the only Robin I ever consistently liked was Tim Drake. He didn't just bring purpose to Robin, but brought the perfect amount of balance to all aspects of Robin. He really is a mini Batman (minus the insanity), is very mature for his age, is a great detective, still cracks jokes but knows when to get serious, etc. He is a terrific character. He deserves every single amount of respect Bruce does.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I like Tim too. Dick is the classic one but he's always been written so unevenly and it seemed like there were long gaps of time in his history in which the writers just didn't know where to take the character.

 

[Shikamaru]

I thought Dick's Robin was generic and two-dimensional. All the "happy go lucky" Robin stereotypes come from his Robin. The thing is that up until about the 70's/80's, most of DC's characters had no character whatsoever. The majority could be summed up to "I'm a superhero and I protect you from evil, random citizen!" By the time DC took the more Marvel route and made their characters more 3D, Dick was already Nightwing.

However, even modern writers still struggle with Dick's Robin due to that. I've even seen some writers write him almost exactly as if he was Tim Drake. It's a Catch-22. On one hand, you can't write his Robin more like Tim's because there already exists a Tim and Dick's Robin is still considered "happy go lucky" within canon. On the other hand, Dick's Robin is also dated in that sense.

Even his origin is dated IMO. I don't know anyone who goes to the circus anymore. It's a dying attraction.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Yeah, I've seen Dick written like Tim, I've seen him written like a young Bruce, and I've seen a generic "older brother" sort of type.

That said, the circus story is still to me the classic, definitive "Robin" origin story.

 

[Shikamaru]

Dick's origin at the core is my favorite as well. That is, the idea of his parents being murdered and Bruce taking him in because he can relate to him, followed by them establishing a connection. However, I think the surface details themselves are very dated.

 

[shauner111]

Honestly, the only Robin I ever consistently liked was Tim Drake. He didn't just bring purpose to Robin, but brought the perfect amount of balance to all aspects of Robin. He really is a mini Batman (minus the insanity), is very mature for his age, is a great detective, still cracks jokes but knows when to get serious, etc. He is a terrific character. He deserves every single amount of respect Bruce does.

Drake's my favorite too. I like Dick better as Nightwing. Can't stand Jason Todd or any other Robin in the comics.

That's why i liked Blake, he reminded me more of Tim Drake than the others.

I thought Dick's Robin was generic and two-dimensional. All the "happy go lucky" Robin stereotypes come from his Robin. The thing is that up until about the 70's/80's, most of DC's characters had no character whatsoever. The majority could be summed up to "I'm a superhero and I protect you from evil, random citizen!" By the time DC took the more Marvel route and made their characters more 3D, Dick was already Nightwing.

However, even modern writers still struggle with Dick's Robin due to that. I've even seen some writers write him almost exactly as if he was Tim Drake. It's a Catch-22. On one hand, you can't write his Robin more like Tim's because there already exists a Tim and Dick's Robin is still considered "happy go lucky" within canon. On the other hand, Dick's Robin is also dated in that sense.

Even his origin is dated IMO. I don't know anyone who goes to the circus anymore. It's a dying attraction.

 

[ThePhantasm]

The circus is a dying attraction, but high-wire type stunts and whatnot aren't. I could see the basic concept of the origin being updated minus the big top tent and the elephants and whatnot.