The Dark Knight Rises The TDKR General Discussion Thread - - - - Part 153

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yep, you've said it much than I could've. My top 2 favourite pure Batman scenes are actually in TDK, the Lau extraction and the interrogation scene (The Joker gets the upper hand psychologically but it was still effing cool to see Batman go to toe with him in the heightened realistic environment Nolan created). The physical toll on Batman in the second film (the cuts and bruises, damaging his knee) I think isn't viewed too kindly by purists I think but I thought it was refreshing to see a superhero in his most human of form. It made me care for Bruce/Batman's 'badass' moments even more. I enjoy most CBM movies but there's always this unwritten idea that you shouldn't challenge your hero too much because it might make him look 'weak'. Well Nolan/Bale (and yes, he is incredibly underrated in the 2nd film particularly) I thought took it head on and made these films more than just about a superhero beating criminals and saving the day. Being Batman is unhealthy but he does it because he cares for his City and his father's legacy.

I still think there's this interesting changing dynamic between Bruce and Batman and how they're portrayed across the trilogy. TDK is the only film of the 3 that introduces Batman first and concludes with Batman. It's Bruce that is introduced before Batman in Begins and Rises.
 
I've always shot down the assertion it wasn't a Batman movie, or Batman was irrelevant, or he didn't get any development, or any cool scenes, or any of the other ridiculous criticisms haters made against it.

He learns what his limits are, what Batman can endure both personally and symbolically, he learns about the nature of criminals like the Joker (and actually learns from his encounter with the Joker to face him again, like by the finale he sees right through the Prewitt building set up as not being what it seems - "It's not that simple. With the Joker it never is"). And yes, his selfless sacrifice at the end when he learns Batman can be what ever Gotham needs him to be. Compare that to Bruce at the beginning of the movie who arrogantly thinks Batman has no limits. Bruce's growth in this movie was learning what they are, what he can and cannot endure, and learning about the terrible nature of freaks like the Joker whom are a reaction to his presence in Gotham just like the copycats. TDK was a real eye opener for Bruce and what exactly the effects of Batman are on himself and on Gotham.

He has tons of great scenes. His take down of Scarecrow and the imposter Batmen in the parking garage. Abducting Lau from China. Kicking ass in Maroni's club and dropping Maroni off the fire escape. The whole Joker truck chase he was bad ass with many cool moments like taking out the garbage truck, birth of the Bat-Pod, and flipping over Joker's truck. The Prewitt building scene is probably the coolest Batman has ever been on film taking out two SWAT teams, Joker's men, and protecting the hostages, too.
There was a great mix of funny and serious Bruce Wayne scenes, too, like the aftermath of Rachel's death where he's quietly mourning her with Alfred - they did a great mirror image of the childhood Bruce mourning his parents there where Alfred comes in, says something about food, Bruce ignores him, Alfred says "Very well" and goes to leave and then Bruce calls him back. All the playboy Bruce stuff was gold. Seeing Bruce use the daylight hours effectively as Bruce by staking out Loeb's funeral, and following Gordon and Reese and having Alfred run a check on all the Cops he recognizes (love that Bruce knows many of the Cops by name) etc.

Bale's performance, and the character in the movie, is often underrated. Take him out of the movie and there is no movie. Everything that happens in it is because of Batman and his presence in Gotham. It's basically an examination of the consequences of Batman on Gotham.

:hmr:

You nailed it, bro!
 
I've always shot down the assertion it wasn't a Batman movie, or Batman was irrelevant, or he didn't get any development, or any cool scenes, or any of the other ridiculous criticisms haters made against it.


It's the most ridiculous assertion anyone could make in regard to TDK.
 
People get distracted by flash, and the Joker is the flashiest character in the movie. Subtle acting often goes underappreciated by many, hence the response to TDK Batman.

Affleck is lucky. His Batman is heavily inspired by Miller, one of the flashiest versions of the character.
 
Last edited:
People get distracted by flash, and the Joker is the flashiest character in the movie. Subtle acting often goes underappreciated by many, hence the response to TDK Batman.

Affleck is lucky. His Batman is heavily inspired by Miller, one of the flashiest versions of the character.

Not only that, but he's also going to be Miller-ish Batman in the context of playing the role of an antagonist for much of the movie, where he has to be presented as credible foe for SUPERMAN.

People are going to be worshiping his Batman at the expense of Bale's a lot in the near future but when you get right down to it, it won't be a fair comparison at all.
 
Bale's performance, and the character in the movie, is often underrated. Take him out of the movie and there is no movie. Everything that happens in it is because of Batman and his presence in Gotham. It's basically an examination of the consequences of Batman on Gotham.

That basically sums it up. The whole trilogy is a character study of Bruce/Batman and Knight is about what Batman does to Gotham. It should also be mentioned that much of Bruce's mindset is informed by Begins. For one, he supports Harvey Dent so strongly largely because he reminds him of his father, a "legitimate" crusader who affected positive change. So in terms of character there isn't really much of a focal shift through any of the movies. It always comes back to Bruce.
 
People get distracted by flash, and the Joker is the flashiest character in the movie. Subtle acting often goes underappreciated by many, hence the response to TDK Batman.

Affleck is lucky. His Batman is heavily inspired by Miller, one of the flashiest versions of the character.
Maybe that's the reason I guess. It always frustrated me that so many people fell into the trap thinking it was a Joker movie. Of course The Joker is designed to steal scenes, that's who he is. But the real drama of the film came from Batman as well as his alliance with Gordon and Dent which falls apart in the end. There was a good 6 months before its release where all talk related to the film was Joker centric (for obvious reasons).

It's interesting how divisive Bale's Batman himself is despite the films being such huge hits.

But yeah, Affleck will probably be playing the bad cop/villain Batman so he'll have all the lines and it'll be Cavill's Superman on the backfoot. Anthony Mackie said this some time ago that Keaton was the best Batman because he played him like an 'everyman' and that the actors of late lacked the coolness of Keaton and that Affleck was going to bring the coolness back. I think Affleck is going to own his role but even here I doubt I'm going to care and fear for his Bruce Wayne/Batman like I did with Bale's.
 
I've had a thought for a while regarding the debates we used to have on what an "appropriate" ending for Batman should be. This really has nothing to with TDKR as I'm mainly talking about comic book Batman, but I thought this would be a good place to share it.

The more I think about it, the more I see mainstream comic Batman dying at a relatively young age (44-early 60's). I just don't see him realistically retiring and living a full life, not with his lifestyle and just who he is as a person. Now I know the whole "I must do this forever" thing didn't show up till Post-Crisis, and Bats talked about retiring one day prior to it, but there's a huge difference between what a character thinks he can/will do and what he actually does when the times comes. And that's a theme a lot of Batman stories have touched on before, including TDK itself. Especially when you look at many similar OCD-induced introvert geniuses or other workaholics that exist in real life, you can't really separate them from their work without putting them through some sort of treatment. Even Doyle's Holmes would go nuts if he couldn't find a challenging case in time. At the very least, someone like Bruce would have to undercover some similar treatment to such people, as Batman to him is in many ways a drug. Or else he'll wait and wait, looking for any reason or excuse to go out and help someone. This is essentially a character who carries the delusion he can eradicate all crime from top (i.e. corporate, mob) to bottom (i.e. common street crooks). That last part is something even DC's writers pointed out in the Gotham Knight commentary. I see him dying more due to over-exhaustion than to any particular self-sacrificial method, but in the end still dying as a hero and leaving an inspirational impact on both the current and next generations to come.

Sounds depressing? Yeah. But it's honestly how I see it realistically playing out, given the details we know about Bruce's life. Though it can't be too depressing, as some of what I just stated towards the end has a lot in common with the ending to TDKR itself (and it was totally unintentional). lol

But here's the catch...the main reason which got me to that point has nothing to do with the comics. Rather, it's because Bats himself reminds me of a person that existed in real life who, in retrospect, reminds me of him and met a similar fate in the end. That man's name was Christopher Hitchens, a journalist from Oxford who died from throat cancer at the age of 62.

Now, I know that may sound silly to those who familiar with his work - obviously Hitchens wasn't mentally unstable or dressed up as a bat or fought crime - but I'm particularly referring to his will and passion for the similar work that he did.

First, like Bruce, Hitchens was a very intelligent man and a jack of all trades. While he didn't exactly have multiple degrees, when it came to specific topics like history and politics he could go on for hours ranting on a particular event, bringing up which author said which and how certain religious ideas formed, etc. I remember in one debate he had with Rabbi David Wolpe over the topic of religion, Wolpe brought up how Evelyn Waugh, a famous writer had said that his Catholicism made him a better person than he would otherwise have been. Hitchens immediately responded with an avalanche of numerous misdeeds Waugh made that violated even the most basic messages of Catholicism, referencing his sources right after. The man was, in many ways, a walking encyclopedia which greatly influenced how entertaining his lectures, published and even his stand-up works. He was also an incredibly charismatic man, managing to possess both charm vigorous anger simultaneously.

But more importantly, Hitchens' will and passionate hatred towards totalitarianism were unmatched. He travelled to numerous places around the world, including the likes of Iraq, Iran and even North Korea - going as far as to go under a second identity in the latter example, as you couldn't go in as a journalist - risking his life just to witness tyrannical nature at its lowest. He hated totalitarianism and cruelty towards his "fellow brothers and sisters" (as he used to say it) of all kinds, dedicating his life to fighting it (through his travels, writings, lectures, public debates) and working towards that goal as if he were a machine. At one point someone asked him why he spends so much time "fighting" things which for the most part didn't affect him; why he didn't just stay home. To which he responded with "Though I do some nights stay home, I enjoy more the nights when I go out and fight against this ultimate wickedness and ultimate stupidity."

Of course, Hitchens was a man who had his flaws. I never found any common ground with him on abortion or the Iraq War, for one, and found his hatred for totalitarianism to sometimes cause him to make unwise decisions without considering all factors. I feel like so few people could challenge him intellectually that sometimes he went too unchallenged. Similarly, I feel as if Bruce's desire to help people as Batman sometimes gets the better of him and causes him to be overconfident, with few of his allies questioning him to the required extent. He also came off sometimes as a bit of an ass, a criticism I've heard towards Bats as well.

His constant use of alcohol and tobacco throughout his career eventually got a hold of him. Still, despite his flaws, I feel as if he ultimately left a far greater positive impact than negative and died a hero. It amazes me how he managed to continue doing what he did till *weeks* before his death, when his body finally gave up on him. Furthermore, in many ways, I find him to be irreplaceable. Expressing each point, each writing with passion, always having something witty or unexpected statement to make up his sleeve...we've truly lost a one-of-a-kind man that I doubt will ever be matched in my lifetime. To this day, I sometimes still wonder "what would Hitchens say" whenever I read a news story.

But unfortunately, it seems that's how such men are destined to end up. They live a relatively short life, but the legacy they leave behind lasts forever.
 
Bale's version is strong enough to endure into the future. The longevity of the character is more important to me, so if people go overboard with Batfleck praise I don't think that's a bad thing.
 
The physical toll on Batman in the second film (the cuts and bruises, damaging his knee) I think isn't viewed too kindly by purists I think but I thought it was refreshing to see a superhero in his most human of form.

I don't know if purists were opposed to that necessarily, the cuts and bruises were a direct homage to a famous Alex Ross painting:

n3434153_38130818_1598.jpg




I still think there's this interesting changing dynamic between Bruce and Batman and how they're portrayed across the trilogy. TDK is the only film of the 3 that introduces Batman first and concludes with Batman. It's Bruce that is introduced before Batman in Begins and Rises.

Very true. I've always felt Begins and TDKR were Bruce-centric films with TDK being the Batman centric film, and the way the characters are introduced totally backs that up. Good call.


I think Affleck is going to own his role but even here I doubt I'm going to care and fear for his Bruce Wayne/Batman like I did with Bale's.

Ditto. That's not a knock against what Snyder seems to be doing, it would be hard for anyone to to come in and match the level of emotional investment that was there with TDKT Batman, just by sheer virtue of being 'emotionally spent' from the last go 'round. That's why positioning him in an antagonistic role where they can turn the 'cool' and badass factor up to 11 is really smart as a business move.

Bale's version is strong enough to endure into the future. The longevity of the character is more important to me, so if people go overboard with Batfleck praise I don't think that's a bad thing.

I don't think the longevity of the character was ever in question. He's looking pretty spry for a 75 year old. :cwink:
 
Realistically, i think Bruce would die of a massive heart attack in his 50's or 60's.

The end of Dark Knight Returns, only it's real.

Not in TDK universe though. I think he escaped such a fate before it was too late. But i do think about Bruce's mind as a 40 something year old man. Would he find a way to help others or go under cover (in a different way) in Italy?? Hmmm.

But yeah, Affleck will probably be playing the bad cop/villain Batman so he'll have all the lines and it'll be Cavill's Superman on the backfoot. Anthony Mackie said this some time ago that Keaton was the best Batman because he played him like an 'everyman' and that the actors of late lacked the coolness of Keaton and that Affleck was going to bring the coolness back. I think Affleck is going to own his role but even here I doubt I'm going to care and fear for his Bruce Wayne/Batman like I did with Bale's.
Bruce or Batman? I thought Bale played him like an everyman and Keaton didn't. I find Mackie to be a kiss-ass to be honest. Constantly putting down DC and what they've done recently just to make the studio and fans happy over at Marvel.

Keaton looked like an everyman as Bruce, but he didn't act that way. I dont think the "everyman" is a super awkward, stumbling on his words, loner who never eats in their kitchen/dining room! Just saying!
 
I'm not sure what would happen to Bruce realistically, as he isn't a realistic man to begin with. Nobody in real life could do what Batman does, even for a whole day.

Mainstream Comic Batman, IMO, would endure, because he isn't a realistic guy and he has trained his body to mental and physical perfection. Grant Morrison's Batman in particular would live a long life, as he was shown to have a talent for enduring tragedies and horrors and moving past them.
 
Last edited:
Even for a day? Come on. I hate when people say that. It makes no sense.
 
Maybe that's the reason I guess. It always frustrated me that so many people fell into the trap thinking it was a Joker movie. Of course The Joker is designed to steal scenes, that's who he is. But the real drama of the film came from Batman as well as his alliance with Gordon and Dent which falls apart in the end. There was a good 6 months before its release where all talk related to the film was Joker centric (for obvious reasons).

I know what you mean. I used to feel that frustration myself. Even when a Batman film is definitively about Batman, people find a way to say otherwise.

It's interesting how divisive Bale's Batman himself is despite the films being such huge hits.

I think Bale's Batman is more popular than it looks at times.

But yeah, Affleck will probably be playing the bad cop/villain Batman so he'll have all the lines and it'll be Cavill's Superman on the backfoot. Anthony Mackie said this some time ago that Keaton was the best Batman because he played him like an 'everyman' and that the actors of late lacked the coolness of Keaton and that Affleck was going to bring the coolness back. I think Affleck is going to own his role but even here I doubt I'm going to care and fear for his Bruce Wayne/Batman like I did with Bale's.

I will agree with him that Keaton was the coolest Batman, and I can see where he's coming from with the "Everyman" bit...but Bale's Bruce Wayne was pretty cool, and so was his Batman.
 
Bale's version is strong enough to endure into the future. The longevity of the character is more important to me, so if people go overboard with Batfleck praise I don't think that's a bad thing.

:highfive: I fully expect Batfleck to be the new champion of the masses, and they'll probably trash Keaton, Bale, and whatever happened before because that's what this Twitter generation does. We obviously have no idea how deep Batfleck will be, but I assume that he'll be lovedmainly because he'll be cool and badass. Like The Batman said, it's all about flash and a TDKR-inspired Batman directed by Snyder will have that in spades.

At the end of the day though, I sincerely doubt anyone will accomplish as much with a comic character as Nolan and Bale did with Batman, and people who care about more than flash will know it.

I'm not sure what would happen to Bruce realistically, as he isn't a realistic man to begin with. Nobody in real life could do what Batman does, even for a whole day.

Mainstream Comic Batman, IMO, would endure, because he isn't a realistic guy and he has trained his body to mental and physical perfection. Grant Morrison's Batman in particular would live a long life, as he was shown to have a talent for enduring tragedies and horrors and moving past them.

This. You bring up a very compelling argument Shikamaru, and it's fun to debate, but I think Bruce would end up more like how he did in Batman Beyond. If anything, Bruce Wayne is a survivor.
 
It also depends on the version. I could see interpretations the likes of Miller's, Morrison's or Waid's have that survivalist quality and keep going for decades, but the slightly more grounded versions like in the Bronze Age, YO Miller's, Timm's, or even Scott Snyder's I can see passing a bit earlier in their life. Hell, at least two of those versions have addressed that possibility head-on.

Also, to clarify a point, I don't mean I see him dying in the sense he'd lose against someone like the Joker. That's why I meant by him not doing in any sort of "self-sacrificial method". Rather I see him going more the way of Hitchens, having more of a non-sentient entity slowly getting to him and him having no direct control over it. It's not something guaranteed, but it's the result you see in similar personality types throughout both fiction and real life. It's too bad comics can't progress past a 10-15 year timeline, as it would be interesting to get those sorts of questions answered.
 
That's part of why I love the ending of TDKR...I think it has to be one of the only instances where Bruce actually has an ending, and a happy one at that. I'll always be grateful to Nolan for giving us that, because it'll probably be the only time our caped crusader will be rewarded with a happy ending.

You have a good point about different versions of Batman, but I'd counter with this: The Batman who is driven to the point of obsession and whose mission consumes him entirely would be the most stubborn, survivalist of them all, wouldn't he? He'd have the most willpower and determination to live, because he'd be the most addicted to his role as Batman. At the very least, he'd probably outlive the milder versions of Batman. As long as the fire inside him keeps burning, I think he'd keep living on to fight another day.
 
I don't think the longevity of the character was ever in question. He's looking pretty spry for a 75 year old. :cwink:
I think it's more a testament to the quality of Nolan trilogy. People thinking the Joker shouldn't be recast, at least for a while, because how solid Ledger was. And laughing at Affleck because Bale's excellent interpretation was fresh in their minds. If Affleck and his take gets praised that's a win in my book, in terms of the character's cinematic future. For many, TDK Trilogy was the high water mark.
 
Not to ruin the joke, but isn't the line "He didn't fly so good"?


:hehe:
 
I think the poster is a parody where the CIA agent lived i.e Rises and is probably seeking revenge. So he didn't "die so good".
 
Bale's version is strong enough to endure into the future. The longevity of the character is more important to me, so if people go overboard with Batfleck praise I don't think that's a bad thing.

I don't think it's a bad thing, either. I always see predictions here that people will be worshipping Affleck's Batman and bashing Bale's in the future, but I think that's an overstatement and an exaggeration.

Outside of this forum and other internet communities (whose members are very vocal, often irrational, and spend every day talking about **** like this), it's not as if all the people who loved and enjoyed Bale's Batman will suddenly turn on the TDKT or forget about it all together. For every irrational, immature idiot in the world who will feel the need to criticize Bale's Batman to build up Affleck's, I'm sure we could find 50 more people that will be more level-headed and appreciative of each interpretation. "Shiny new toy" syndrome does exist, but it is much more prominent and noticeable in places like this.

Age also plays a factor in conversations like that, I feel. It seems to me that older fans like many of ourselves, who have a greater understanding of the comic book mythology and have now lived lived through multiple generations of live-action Batman films, are more appreciative and respectful of each interpretation of the character. We can recognize that no Batman interpretation will be without fault and might not always line up with our perspectives of the character, but that each one is valid and worthy of recognition.

I can never see myself writing of Bale's Batman or Keaton's Batman just because a newer version comes along. It's silly and childish. Anyone who does that is only hurting themselves and missing out, IMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,310
Messages
22,083,673
Members
45,883
Latest member
marvel2099fan89
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"