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

[shauner111]

Ill answer some of your posts Joker, probably tomorrow but ill just quickly answer these since they're more recent.

in TDKR, Bruce Wayne was written as real person that can move on. Why can't he be like a normal person, like me, that, despite all the trials and hardships in my life, I find myself moving on and letting go of the past.

That's exactly right. And as far as im concerned, a person who can never get past the tragic things in their life, is a very weak person inside. No matter how strong he is physically. And that's how ive seen the character. Tim Burton's version of Bruce was that of a man who was physically and spiritually weak and so when he puts on the suit it makes him strong. That comes from Burton himself. Which is a very different interpretation since Bruce is usually a bigger, stronger man.

Nolan saw it the way i see it. He's a weak individual. For Bruce to continue through his 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s..as Batman or not...as a guy who can't move on. That's forever a weak man. Bruce moving on to find happiness means that he has become stronger spiritually. And i prefer to look at Bruce as being a character that i can look up to, to inspire me to kick life in the teeth, not a brittle man on the inside.

Nolan´s movies should be considered an Elseworlds story, so it´s perfectly find to change certain elements that are taken for granted in "continuity" comics.

And anyone that thinks the nature of Batman is set in stone should read all comics from all decades since 1939. They would find plenty of stuff that goes against what their idea of what Batman really is.

Bruce not being able to retire actually goes against the preestablished nature of the character. DC wanna sell him as a human, but then portrays him as relentless combat machine that is able to undergo physical and psychological traumas that would be fatal to anyone. And they do it because this is what sells. This is what allows them to publish thousands and thousands of books. It makes sense from a financial stand point.

Nolan actually respected the nature of the character a lot more than most comic book writers, that´s why he tried to portray him as human as possible. This is the reason why in TDK trilogy Bruce is weaker than in the comics. For Nolan´s vision of the character, it wouldn´t have made sense to have a human that can go as far as Batman goes in the comics. And it wouldn´t have made sense to have a human that doesn´t actually want to be happy and have a normal life.

Bruce´s obsession with being Batman was actually very well described in the movie. That´s why he returns in TDKR. If the obsession wasn´t there, he wouldn´t have done it. When the movie starts, he isn´t Batman anymore, but that´s not because he doesn´t want to. That´s because he isn´t needed. If you pay attention to the movie you can easily understand that. But as soon as things go wrong, he´s back to being Batman again.

The difference between Nolan and comic book writers is that Nolan isn´t afraid to say "enough".

Post of the year!

The most relateable thing about Bruce is that he's human and he works at becoming better. That's always been the main attraction + the darkness which is obviously "cool". But then DC likes to make him a "Bat-God" by making him the greatest detective the planet has ever seen, not just a really great one, but a the world's greatest. Instead of making him one of the greatest martial artists you've seen, they make him a fighter that is extremely exaggerated to the point where it seems like he is a master at every single style in the history of martial arts. They practically make him a scientist, a-this, a-that as well. Then they make him into a man who is the least human out of anyone, and that's fine for a good amount of time that he is Batman, especially in his prime. Because that's the whole point of the struggle. But DC make him like this for the remainder of his life. So he's a human being who has the least amount of humanity..and that no longer makes him relatable. It's still cool and we buy it because it's the goddamn Batman and he looks cool brooding in his batcave, no matter what age he is. But like you, i dont think that matches with the essence of the character which is to be this dark human being. A person who can show the readers that he can come out of that and be strong both physically and mentally. Because that's what strong people do & what we all hope to do when we're at our weakest.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

Writers aren't afraid to say "enough".

If Bruce gets over Batman, which he doesn't, because that's his obsession and who he really is, then that's the end of him as a character. It's a finality, no more.

 

[Kato Rises]

Writers aren't afraid to say "enough".

If Bruce gets over Batman, which he doesn't, because that's his obsession and who he really is, then that's the end of him as a character. It's a finality, no more.

Bruce is a product of the writer´s imagination. It takes only one writer to change the whole concept. And that has been done in the comics, more than once. A lot of the elements of his world have been changed drastically. It might take decades, but eventually they change.

And like i said, it´s not like Nolan completely erased Bruce´s obsession. It´s still there. The difference is that he is able to do something truly humane, wich is to pursue happiness. That, by itself, pays homage to the original concept. He has skills, but he is still a human. A human is fragile. A human needs love. A human has limitations. And any man who has such a self-destructive lifestyle will eventually end up discovering his limitations sooner than later.

And even for a human, Nolan´s Batman goes pretty far. Further than that and we might as well just give him super powers.

 

[Travesty]

Bye, Kato.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

Got to three posts and already hit probo lol

 

[The Endless]

I possibly would not have minded Bruce Wayne retiring as Batman. If it was done in a good way.

Rises definitely wasn't. Not a single mention of his parents (a visit to their graves before he ****s off to Italy?!), he leaves the Bat Cave and all his tech to some cop who isn't really that good a cop. And he ****s off to Italy with a woman he barely knows and who in fact at one point betrayed him and left him for dead.

These three things are major issues in terms of characterisation. All three of them are like, anti-Batman traits. The complete opposite of what the character written for 75 years would do.

See i don't mind adaptations of characters. As long as the core essence is still there. Rises threw the ESSENCE of Batman straight out the window.

 

[milost]

I possibly would not have minded Bruce Wayne retiring as Batman. If it was done in a good way.

Rises definitely wasn't. Not a single mention of his parents (a visit to their graves before he ****s off to Italy?!), he leaves the Bat Cave and all his tech to some cop who isn't really that good a cop. And he ****s off to Italy with a woman he barely knows and who in fact at one point betrayed him and left him for dead.

These three things are major issues in terms of characterisation. All three of them are like, anti-Batman traits. The complete opposite of what the character written for 75 years would do.

See i don't mind adaptations of characters. As long as the core essence is still there. Rises threw the ESSENCE of Batman straight out the window.

Atleast he was happy and got a happy ending though, right?

 

[The Endless]

Awww bless him.

 

[Visceral]

What if Bruce started beating up people for overdue library books.

 

[milost]

What if Bruce started beating up people for overdue library books.

 

[The Joker]

I possibly would not have minded Bruce Wayne retiring as Batman. If it was done in a good way.

Rises definitely wasn't. Not a single mention of his parents (a visit to their graves before he ****s off to Italy?!), he leaves the Bat Cave and all his tech to some cop who isn't really that good a cop. And he ****s off to Italy with a woman he barely knows and who in fact at one point betrayed him and left him for dead.

These three things are major issues in terms of characterisation. All three of them are like, anti-Batman traits. The complete opposite of what the character written for 75 years would do.

See i don't mind adaptations of characters. As long as the core essence is still there. Rises threw the ESSENCE of Batman straight out the window.

Exactly

A bad character adaption is the kind that misses the core essence of the character.

For the record Nolan did not make him more human. He just made him less interesting. He made Bruce get over his Batman obsession. He healed him. That takes away the main thing that makes Bruce such a an interesting character.

 

[shauner111]

See i don't mind adaptations of characters. As long as the core essence is still there. Rises threw the ESSENCE of Batman straight out the window.

That all depends on what you see as being the "essence" of Batman. The essence of the character, to me, is a lot simpler than yours. Which seems to be a pretty detailed list of what you think is the essence. A lot of you on here have such a detailed list of do's and don'ts. To me the essence is that of a dark vigilante by the name of Bruce Wayne who puts on a bat costume to strike fear into the hearts of criminals all because of his traumatic childhood when his parents were killed in front of his eyes. That's it. The only bits that i would call essential.

If Aronofsky directed a Batman movie where he had no inheritance, no money and was living in a crappy apartment..that would be different but wouldnt go against the essence of the character for me. The weaker physical portrayal of Keaton's Bruce is different but doesn't **** on the character. Any kind of ending for Bruce also doesnt spit on the essence, whether i like it or not.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

What if Bruce started beating up people for overdue library books.

"Let me tell you something, funny boy..."

 

[gugumugats]

I possibly would not have minded Bruce Wayne retiring as Batman. If it was done in a good way.

Rises definitely wasn't. Not a single mention of his parents (a visit to their graves before he ****s off to Italy?!), he leaves the Bat Cave and all his tech to some cop who isn't really that good a cop. And he ****s off to Italy with a woman he barely knows and who in fact at one point betrayed him and left him for dead.

These three things are major issues in terms of characterisation. All three of them are like, anti-Batman traits. The complete opposite of what the character written for 75 years would do.

See i don't mind adaptations of characters. As long as the core essence is still there. Rises threw the ESSENCE of Batman straight out the window.

Out of curiosity, what is the ESSENCE of Batman? Does Adam West Batman exclude the ESSENCE of Batman?

You raise good points, but I have some counterpoints too:

1) I think Bruce has always had his parents in mind even to the end of Rises. He wanted Wayne Manor to remain standing up to his death and dedicated it to his parent's name.

In addition, he did give Selina his mother's necklace which in a sick Oedipal way, is him upholding the memory of his mother. He's probably thinking that his mother would want him to give the necklace to a woman he loves rather than keep it locked away.

I also think that Talia's role in Rises was to show Bruce/Batman the insanity of avenging your parents to the point of self-destruction.

Plus this Bruce was never shown to be the type to talk to his parents' grave.


2) Yes, Bruce had League of Shadows training and a buttload of experience before that, but I think more important than that is the will to uphold Justice at almost any cost even if it means breaking the law. I think that Blake did show that will and altruism and Bruce may have somehow recognized that.

Plus, Blake has shown some brilliance: figuring out the Leagues' plan, predicting that they'll try to assassinate Gordon, surviving during No Man's Land as a cop, getting away with communicating with the trapped cops, and there must have been some unmentioned things when he deduced Bruce's identity with limited resources and a sharp mind (I think this is what told Bruce that Blake was at least above average).

You can also argue that Terry McGinnis was way more unqualified compared to Blake, yet Bruce let him run around in a Batman suit.


3) In the 75 years of his publication history, Batman has done some really stupid **** and compromised a lot of his ideals in regards to Catwoman. He has married her in some storylines regardless of her history. He has also let her get away with a lot of ****. Was this un-Batman like of him given that he has often done this in his many stories?

Now with Selina in Rises, when you're infatuated with someone, you're gonna do some stupid **** (Batman outside of the TDKt has done this plenty of times). However, he did recognize that they share a buttload of qualities (past traumas, ability to kick-ass, loner-ish qualities) and also the shared experience from the battle in Gotham probably brought this two closer together.

As for betraying him, she pointed out that he was asking for it. She also redeemed herself when she came back for Bruce/Batman even though she had every opportunity and reason to escape Gotham. I also think that thinking the best in people is actually a trait that Batman has shown despite his paranoia. There are stories in which he is invested in his rogues' rehabilitation (although sometimes for selfish reasons).


So what exactly is the ESSENCE of Batman?

 

[The Endless]

That all depends on what you see as being the "essence" of Batman. The essence of the character, to me, is a lot simpler than yours. Which seems to be a pretty detailed list of what you think is the essence. A lot of you on here have such a detailed list of do's and don'ts. To me the essence is that of a dark vigilante by the name of Bruce Wayne who puts on a bat costume to strike fear into the hearts of criminals all because of his traumatic childhood when his parents were killed in front of his eyes. That's it. The only bits that i would call essential.

If Aronofsky directed a Batman movie where he had no inheritance, no money and was living in a crappy apartment..that would be different but wouldnt go against the essence of the character for me. The weaker physical portrayal of Keaton's Bruce is different but doesn't **** on the character. Any kind of ending for Bruce also doesnt spit on the essence, whether i like it or not.

No i can surmise the true essence of Batman with one word.

Obsession.

 

[milost]

To me the essence is that of a dark vigilante by the name of Bruce Wayne who puts on a bat costume to strike fear into the hearts of criminals all because of his traumatic childhood when his parents were killed in front of his eyes.

Except by the end of TDKR, he's not Batman nor Bruce Wayne and doesn't seem too traumatized by his parents death anymore.

So in essence, he's none of those things. He's "tourist cafe hoppin', happy man".

 

[Shikamaru]

I possibly would not have minded Bruce Wayne retiring as Batman. If it was done in a good way.

Rises definitely wasn't. Not a single mention of his parents (a visit to their graves before he ****s off to Italy?!), he leaves the Bat Cave and all his tech to some cop who isn't really that good a cop. And he ****s off to Italy with a woman he barely knows and who in fact at one point betrayed him and left him for dead.

These three things are major issues in terms of characterisation. All three of them are like, anti-Batman traits. The complete opposite of what the character written for 75 years would do.

See i don't mind adaptations of characters. As long as the core essence is still there. Rises threw the ESSENCE of Batman straight out the window.

inb4hegotmadddetectiveskillz

 

[milost]

andstufff

 

[shauner111]

Exactly

A bad character adaption is the kind that misses the core essence of the character.

For the record Nolan did not make him more human. He just made him less interesting. He made Bruce get over his Batman obsession. He healed him. That takes away the main thing that makes Bruce such a an interesting character.

I think it's the other way around. Giving him a proper ending since the comics don't have the balls or quite frankly can't, makes it more interesting than ending it on a classic Batman on a rooftop scene. Or Bruce chilling in his batcave forever thinking of ways to frown. Ill take the typical scenes over him dying young though. I will say that.

Nolan DID make him more human. Moving on is a part of life, part of being human. It inspires people to move on from the pain instead of drowning in it for the rest of your life. The key for me is to show him struggle with that darkness for a massive chunk of his life, maybe even most of it, but i want to see him pull through or else it's the same crap over and over again. It stops being inspiring after a while.

TDKReturns was another fantastic way to do it. I see Bruce leaving Gotham with his army, spreading it around the globe. TDKR didn't want to completely use the ending note for note, nor did Nolan need to have Bruce standing in the cave at the end for me to use my imagination and think of Blake training with Bruce in a different continent. To me Blake does just that and returns to Gotham which echoes Bruce's journey. Do you really think Bruce is going to train Blake in a cave like that? Or train him in the backyard of Wayne Manor when it's now a school full of orphans!? The best scenario would be for Blake to travel to meet Bruce/Selina and they can start their training right then and there.

 

[Shikamaru]

Bruce doesn't drown in pain, nor is he emotionally weak or anything like that. At least not past his early years as Batman. Firstly, I think that's quite a disrespectful statement since it is essentially the proverbial "bigger and badder" argument. Secondly, Bruce is all about giving to others at his own expense. He can technically quit anytime, have the ideal wife and family, seek professional therapy to get over the pain, etc. But he chooses not to do it because he knows the world is in need of a Batman. That's why he refuses to quit or let anything bring him down/change him. It's not about revenge (or at least not entirely about it), and that's also part of why he doesn't kill his villains like the Punisher does (who is motivated by revenge). Despite all his issues and hatred of criminals, he still has a lot of compassion for life in general.

Ironically, when guys like Superman give their idealistic speech of how important it is to not "drown in pain" due to its leading path to vengeance, Batman arguably understands that the most, out of everyone in the crowd.

You can also argue that Terry McGinnis was way more unqualified compared to Blake, yet Bruce let him run around in a Batman suit.

While constantly training/mentoring/supervising him. He also had him run around in a highly advanced batsuit as opposed to a regular one.

 

[shauner111]

No i can surmise the true essence of Batman with one word.

Obsession.

There you go, the essence is different for everybody. To act as if there's a specific essence to the character like some rulebook is weird.

Except by the end of TDKR, he's not Batman nor Bruce Wayne and doesn't seem too traumatized by his parents death anymore.

So in essence, he's none of those things. He's "tourist cafe hoppin', happy man".

Well, he still is who he is. He's Bruce Wayne no matter what he changes him name to. And he was Batman, the creator of it. By that logic, when he's 68 and not Batman anymore...well you get the point. What i should have said is that he becomes a bat to scare criminals and the amount of time he IS batman or how that ends is completely irrelevant and up to the writer.

 

[The Joker]

Out of curiosity, what is the ESSENCE of Batman? Does Adam West Batman exclude the ESSENCE of Batman?

No, Adam West was an excellent Batman. He never gave up the mantle to live a normal life. In fact he generally shunned the idea of romance or any semblance of something that would bring regular normality to Bruce Wayne's life because it wouldn't fit into his life as Batman.

The only time he showed a genuine interest in a woman was Miss Kitka in the spin off movie, and she turned out to be Catwoman messing with him.

1) I think Bruce has always had his parents in mind even to the end of Rises. He wanted Wayne Manor to remain standing up to his death and dedicated it to his parent's name.

That's not the same as visiting their graves before he leaves. That's just making sure Gotham remembers their names and his. Like leaving a legacy.

In addition, he did give Selina his mother's necklace which in a sick Oedipal way, is him upholding the memory of his mother. He's probably thinking that his mother would want him to give the necklace to a woman he loves rather than keep it locked away.

"Those pearls do look better on you than they did in my safe"

I think it was more case of since he and Selina were now an item instead of her being a thief who stole from him, and he knew she liked them "She likes them too much", he let her have them.

I also think that Talia's role in Rises was to show Bruce/Batman the insanity of avenging your parents to the point of self-destruction.

There is no parallel there. Talia was seeking revenge against the man who she thinks killed her father. Bruce was seeking justice by fighting crime. "I seek the means to fight injustice. To turn fear against those who prey on the fearful".

Plus this Bruce was never shown to be the type to talk to his parents' grave.

He didn't have to talk to them. Just visit them.

2) Yes, Bruce had League of Shadows training and a buttload of experience before that, but I think more important than that is the will to uphold Justice at almost any cost even if it means breaking the law. I think that Blake did show that will and altruism and Bruce may have somehow recognized that.

If you haven't got the knowledge, training and know how to do that to Batman level standard, then your will and altruism isn't worth jack.

Plus, Blake has shown some brilliance: figuring out the Leagues' plan, predicting that they'll try to assassinate Gordon, surviving during No Man's Land as a cop, getting away with communicating with the trapped cops, and there must have been some unmentioned things when he deduced Bruce's identity with limited resources and a sharp mind (I think this is what told Bruce that Blake was at least above average).

Most of the Cops survived Bane's siege. Slipping a note down on a string through a sewer grate hardly makes him Batman material. And the deduction of Batman's identity was one of the stupidest written scenes ever.

Blake's actions in this movie don't equate to someone who shows he's a possible capable Batman. He didn't save Gordon in the hospital. Gordon saved himself. He didn't save the Cops underground. Batman did, and he saved Blake's life, too, after he got caught in his clumsy attempt to save them by himself. He killed two suspects at the construction site, and he looked like he didn't even realize shooting them would kill them.

You can also argue that Terry McGinnis was way more unqualified compared to Blake, yet Bruce let him run around in a Batman suit.

Terry initially stole the suit, which was a high tech suit with all kinds of advanced gadgetry in it. After Terry showed promise in the suit by foiling the criminals at W.E. Bruce accepted him. Not to mention Terry was CONSTANTLY under Bruce's guidance and supervision.

3) In the 75 years of his publication history, Batman has done some really stupid **** and compromised a lot of his ideals in regards to Catwoman. He has married her in some storylines regardless of her history. He has also let her get away with a lot of ****. Was this un-Batman like of him given that he has often done this in his many stories?

No. How is any of this out of character? Batman makes mistakes. He's not infallible. But he learns from them. Like in TDK when Joker tricked him into saving Dent instead of Rachel. Batman learned from that. Later in the movie he sees through Joker's Prewitt Building set up.

"It's not that simple. With the Joker it never is".

As for marrying Catwoman, he married a good girl version of the character. One who had reformed and changed her ways. Like Selina at the end of Rises who came back, saved his life, and helped him save the city.

That's one criticism people made against the end of Rises that I don't agree with. Selina had proven herself when she did that. She could have left Gotham and saved herself. But she came back and did the right thing.

So what exactly is the ESSENCE of Batman?

Obsession. He will never give up Batman indefinitely. He is just not psychologically wired that way.

 

[milost]

Giving him a proper ending since the comics don't have the balls or quite frankly can't, makes it more interesting than ending it on a classic Batman on a rooftop scene.

We could also say that Nolan didn't have the "balls" to kill off Batman/Bruce Wayne or that he simply couldn't if he wanted to.

 

[The Joker]

I think it's the other way around. Giving him a proper ending since the comics don't have the balls or quite frankly can't, makes it more interesting than ending it on a classic Batman on a rooftop scene. Or Bruce chilling in his batcave forever thinking of ways to frown. Ill take the typical scenes over him dying young though. I will say that.

How is ending the most interesting aspect of the character, his emotional pain and obsession, and turning him into a happy ever after guy more interesting? Really I don't get that.

Nolan DID make him more human.

No he didn't. Not even remotely. He just made him much less interesting.

Moving on is a part of life, part of being human.

So is endless emotional pain and obsession.

It inspires people to move on from the pain instead of drowning in it for the rest of your life. The key for me is to show him struggle with that darkness for a massive chunk of his life, maybe even most of it, but i want to see him pull through or else it's the same crap over and over again. It stops being inspiring after a while.

You're not meant to be inspired by Batman. Can you cite me a single source where Batman is meant to inspire people at all?

You want to see Batman cured of what makes him Batman. That's not who the character is. It's all well and good if that's what you like, but that is not what the character is. In other words it goes against the core essence of him.

TDKReturns was another fantastic way to do it. I see Bruce leaving Gotham with his army, spreading it around the globe.

Who said Bruce left Gotham in TDK Returns?

TDKR didn't want to completely use the ending note for note, nor did Nolan need to have Bruce standing in the cave at the end for me to use my imagination and think of Blake training with Bruce in a different continent. To me Blake does just that and returns to Gotham which echoes Bruce's journey. Do you really think Bruce is going to train Blake in a cave like that? Or train him in the backyard of Wayne Manor when it's now a school full of orphans!? The best scenario would be for Blake to travel to meet Bruce/Selina and they can start their training right then and there.

Yes why not? Why can't he? He did it in TDK Returns. Set a whole new cave under ground for his new Batman army, where he was not training just one guy, but hundreds of them.

You say he couldn't train one guy in secrecy? Come off it, man.

 

[shauner111]

He had carte blanche to do what he wanted. If he wanted to kill him, he would have. But he would have never made the movie if he didn't have Bruce move on to find inner peace. Those comics are one way of doing it, doesn't mean you can't end his story in a different way. I also never read the first one.