The Dark Knight Rises The TDKR General Discussion Thread - - - - - Part 154

[Travesty]

No, he didn't put Ra's on the train, but he knew he was on there, and he did tell Gordon to blow the tracks. And when Ra's was talking about stopping the train, Batman did say, "who said anything about stopping?". It was all premeditated. Sure, he didn't "save him" from the very death trap he purposefully put him in. Plus, Nolan admitted that he broke his rule on Ra's.

But I still think the funniest kill in TDKT, is when Bruce is in the temple, and he says he's no executioner, and then he decides to kill everyone by blowing it up.

-I'm no executioner.....so I shall kill you all!

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I just rewatched the Ras vs Batman fight scene, and you know what, it was Ras that destroyed the controls. Holy crap. And all this time I thought it was Batman.

In my defense, the muddled editing in conjunction with the dark apparel that covers both their hands made it extremely hard to tell whose hand it was. Nolan should've used a wider shot to give it a clearer context. But that just sums up the action editing of Batman Begins.

 

[shauner111]

Hes not going to chop a mans head off in cold blood. That's being an executioner. Lighting a fire could kill people, they have a chance to escape, and i doubt he expected everyone to die. He also made that decision on the fly. It was a way to escape their clutches and to send a message. He saved Ras' life once, he wasn't going to do it again if Ras really wanted to kill himself and a bunch of innocents. Especially since Ras burnt down his home and left him for dead. Ras was going to kill himself and more so why not blow the tracks? It's going to save their lives at least. Let Ras die if he wants to kill himself.

It's not the same as murdering a person like a executioner. He doesnt use guns and he wont execute a man or woman for the sake of stopping them. If it means killing them by saving an innocent life, yes. He'll kill Joker right there on the street if he's about to slaughter a child for instance. Any version of Batman would do the same. But he's not going to walk up to a criminal and throw a grenade at their face or strap a bomb on them, send his batmobile into a plant with people in there and blow the place up just to rid the world of evil men. He wont spear Two-Face off a balcony unless Dent is holding somebody hostage. He won't let Ras Al Ghul die if Ras was inside a building that he planned on blowing up, with the intention on running out of that building before it went to pieces. Batman would have probably saved Ras' life in that instance and locked him up. But that wasn't Ras Al Ghul's plan in Batman Begins.

He became Batman once his parents got killed. #trufacts

Technically yes. But that's not what im saying. You still need training, intelligence, a moral code that is developed over time and a suit.

I just rewatched the Ras vs Batman fight scene, and you know what, it was Ras that destroyed the controls. Holy crap. And all this time I thought it was Batman.

In my defense, the muddled editing in conjunction with the dark apparel that covers both their hands made it extremely hard to tell whose hand it was. Nolan should've used a wider shot to give it a clearer context. But that just sums up the action editing of Batman Begins.

This is why we always defend Batman in that scene. He didn't put Ras on that train, he didn't destroy the controls.

 

[TheBlur]

I always thought Batman got on the train to stop it, but had Gordon blow the tracks to ensure that it wasn't gonna make it to Wayne Tower in case he didn't manage to accomplish it. So the scene where Batman is in the train's cockpit is him trying to stop it, then Ra's comes in and stabs the controls to ensure the train doesn't stop, leaving Batman with no other choice but to let the train fall; and Ra's basically sealing his own fate.

 

[shauner111]

That's what happened. He wanted to stop the train, but just incase Ras was on a suicide mission (which we find out, was Ras' plan anyway)...he told Gordon to blow the tracks.

Batman is completely innocent. I dont care what the Nolans say. He tried to stop the train which would have saved Ras' life as well.

 

[BatLobster]

I'm pretty sure the line to Gordon is, "I'm gonna stop them from loading that train but I may need your help." Then it cuts away, so the implication we're left with is Gordon is a failsafe. That's not the same as creating a death trap. Batman didn't want them to get the train moving in the first place and thought he could prevent it.

Anyway, I think the point is...ultimately, Bruce is human and he's not infallible. There is some naiveté and recklessness in his actions despite having the best of intentions. Even though he wasn't BatGod and he was far from perfect, if he didn't have some sort of self-imposed code he would've easily crossed the line more often and more intentionally, getting swallowed up by the rage addiction. Like Bale has said, he had the rage pushing him on one hand and his father's philanthropism pulling him back on the other. It was a constant push and pull there. He was far from totally clean, but far from The Punisher too.

The garbage truck scene does make me raise an eyebrow, but I just try to suspend disbelief there as it's clearly there to provide a visceral action beat. Though I admit that is questionable.

On The Fire Rises doc Goyer talks about how one of the big points of the trilogy is Bruce not realizing what the consequences of putting the cowl on would be. It's one man trying to take on some very complex issues. It's a moral crusade in a sense, and you're not gonna win it every night.

 

[I Am The Knight]

At no point did Batman set out to kill Ra's. That's just ridiculous.

 

[Travesty]

-He [Batman] has this one rule, as the Joker says in The Dark Knight. But he does wind up breaking it. Does he break it in the third film?

Christopher Nolan: He breaks it in...

Jonathan Nolan: ...the first two.

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=uwV8rddtKRgC&pg=PR8&dq=But+he+does+wind+up+breaking+it.&hl=en&sa=X&ei=#v=onepage&q=But%20he%20does%20wind%20up%20breaking%20it.&f=false

 

[I Am The Knight]

Well, that doesn't make any sense. Why would the Nolan bros make the "no kill" rule such a big plot point in TDK if Batman had already killed in BB?

 

[Shikamaru]

Gotta disagree with Nolan on that. While I don't vision my ideal Batman leaving someone on a train to die, I wouldn't say it was cold blooded murder (for reasons already stated).

Also, TDKR events aside, I think the Bruce we have by the end of TDK wouldn't make that mistake again. I brought up a few posts ago how BB and TDK were each one of two parts to the Trolley Problem. Once you undergo the second part of the problem, for better or worse, your response to the first part of the problem would be somewhat different than before.

But I still think the funniest kill in TDKT, is when Bruce is in the temple, and he says he's no executioner, and then he decides to kill everyone by blowing it up.

-I'm no executioner.....so I shall kill you all!

That was their fault. They had plenty of time to get out before the fire escalated. Instead they chose to sit there, draw out their swords and fight Bruce.

 

[The Joker]

-He [Batman] has this one rule, as the Joker says in The Dark Knight. But he does wind up breaking it. Does he break it in the third film?

Christopher Nolan: He breaks it in...

Jonathan Nolan: ...the first two.

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=uwV8rddtKRgC&pg=PR8&dq=But+he+does+wind+up+breaking+it.&hl=en&sa=X&ei=#v=onepage&q=But%20he%20does%20wind%20up%20breaking%20it.&f=false

Cont'd;

David Goyer: "Well in the first it's kind of yes and no. I think you're referring to Ra's Al Ghul where Batman says "I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you"

Chris Nolan: "Yeah he gets by on a technicality with that one"

And with TDK, we know he was responsible for Dent's death, but that was an act of desperation to save a child's life. The lesser of two evils. So there's his two "rule breaks" covered.

That was their fault. They had plenty of time to get out before the fire escalated. Instead they chose to sit there, draw out their swords and fight Bruce.

Exactly.

 

[BlueLightning]

There was a "learning curve" that appears on Begins that was made explicit by Alfred. The point was that the Tumbler chase was indeed irresponsible on Bruce's part.

This following exchange is one of my favorites.

ALFRED
When you told me your grand plan to save Gotham, one thing stopped me from calling the men in the white coats...(Off look) You said it wasn't about thrill-seeking.

WAYNE
It's not.

Alfred points at the television.

ALFRED
(stern)
Well, what do you call that?

Alfred indicates the television: footage from the chase.

WAYNE
Damn good television.

ALFRED
It's a miracle no one was injured.

WAYNE
I didn't have time to observe the highway code, Alfred.

ALFRED
You're getting lost in this creature of yours.

WAYNE
I'm using this creature to help people like my father did.

ALFRED
For Thomas Wayne, helping others was never about proving anything to anyone. Including himself.

WAYNE
It was Rachel, Alfred. She was dying.

Alfred reacts

She's downstairs, sedated. I need you to take her home.

Alfred nods. Moves towards the bookcase. He stops. Turns.

ALFRED
We both care about Rachel, sir. But what you're doing has to be beyond that. It can't be personal. Or you're just a vigilante.

Wayne looks from Alfred to the door.

WAYNE
Is Fox still here?

Alfred nods.

We need to send these people away.

ALFRED
Those are Bruce Wayne's guests out there. You have a name to maintain -

WAYNE
I don't care about my name.

ALFRED
It's not just your name, it's you father's name. And it's all that is left of him. Don't destroy it.

Bruce is still learning, he doesn't have all the answers and is working with what he has without taking in consideration many things. Alfred understands that the mission that his surrogate son has embarked upon must be greater than a personal motive. And they both defend their view, even with leading to them to say some harsh words.


The following exchange is an understanding of both of them on their viewpoints.

WAYNE
What have I done, Alfred? Everything my family... my father built...

Alfred struggles to Wayne, removes his jacket. Wayne's shirt is thick with blood.

ALFRED
(hoarse)
The Wayne legacy is more than bricks and mortar, sir.

Wayne stares up at the glowing shaft. Lost in his despair. Alfred rips Wayne's shirt open... a large gash in his arm.

WAYNE
I thought I could... help Gotham... but I've failed.

Alfred rips the shirt. Binds the wound.

ALFRED
And why do we fall, sir?

Wayne looks at Alfred's bruised, smudged, yet dignified face.

ALFRED
So that we might better learn to pick ourselves up.

Wayne looks up at his old friend.

WAYNE
Still haven't given up on me?

Alfred offers him a trembling hand.

ALFRED
(conviction)
Never.

Here we have a reversal. They both understand that Bruce's care's for his family legacy, and Alfred knows that Bruce is part of that legacy too. But Alfred pushes Bruce to strive for something greater, and Bruce acknowledges this.

 

[Shikamaru]

This may sound weird to some, but it's ultimately irrelevant what the Nolans say. While their voice is obviously valid, art takes a life of its own separate from its creators. There's plenty of aspects of a work which was not intended to be there by the author, yet one could make an argument that it's there. In fact, it's very common when it comes to storytelling. Honestly, it's a lesson I only learned in recent years.

Stephen King's approach is a perfect example of this. He writes a draft, then he puts it aside, comes back to it later, reads it over and takes notes of what's there. Similarly, going back to Batman, this goes both ways. Many people think he killed the Joker at the end of The Killing Joke despite Moore confirming that wasn't the intention (nor was it in the script). Doesn't mean it makes any less sense in the context of the story.

 

[BatLobster]

Not to mention, I'm sure Chris, Jonah and David still probably don't agree 100% on every single aspect of the trilogy. From that same interview, you get little pieces of where they may differ on some things.

Chris and Jonah didn't even agree on what the ending of Memento was supposed to mean.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Something I've been wondering: how come the LOS under Bane were clumsy militia mercenaries? What happened to the ninja skills of the LOS under Ra's?

 

[BatLobster]

I've always subscribed to the belief that a lot of the mercenaries were Bane's followers, hence why they were so loyal and willing to die for him. It's possible a lot of the existing infrastructure went away once Ra's died. Not to mention the ones who went boom with the temple.

You do see some mercs in scarves that look just like the TDKR ones in BB though.

 

[Brother Jack]

Something I've been wondering: how come the LOS under Bane were clumsy militia mercenaries? What happened to the ninja skills of the LOS under Ra's?

It's a difference of method. Bane was a bombastic, militaristic force as opposed to shadowy ninjitsu. Even after destruction with the monorail the city at large didn't seem to realize it had been infiltrated by the league. There was a bit of a Colonel Kurtz vibe to Bane. Under his and Talia's leadership the LOS had taken a different tact to sacking Gotham. Ra's was smoke & mirrors (quasi spirituality as well), Joker was chaotic screwery, and Bane was militaristic might.

 

[Alex Logan]

That's what happened. He wanted to stop the train, but just incase Ras was on a suicide mission (which we find out, was Ras' plan anyway)...he told Gordon to blow the tracks.

Batman is completely innocent. I dont care what the Nolans say. He tried to stop the train which would have saved Ras' life as well.

Howdy.

 

[Team Andino]

It's a difference of method. Bane was a bombastic, militaristic force as opposed to shadowy ninjitsu. Even after destruction with the monorail the city at large didn't seem to realize it had been infiltrated by the league. There was a bit of a Colonel Kurtz vibe to Bane. Under his and Talia's leadership the LOS had taken a different tact to sacking Gotham. Ra's was smoke & mirrors (quasi spirituality as well), Joker was chaotic screwery, and Bane was militaristic might.

To go further on that, in the beginning of TDKR the CIA agent was obviously aware of Bane's existence but knew next to nothing about him hence his questions to the hooded men on the plane. I almost feel like Ra's was so good at keeping hidden that his decoys from BB helped keep his identity secret, as if the CIA would actually know even less about Ra's than they did Bane.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

But we do know Ra's and Bane and the LOS are known, as Alfred was able to google information about them so he can put their story in an eloquent monologue to Bruce.

 

[Decepticonus]

But we do know Ra's and Bane and the LOS are known, as Alfred was able to google information about them so he can put their story in an eloquent monologue to Bruce.

Maybe the LOS have a facebook page???

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Or twitter.

#bringbackbane

 

[The Joker]

Or Alfred was able to hack into CIA or FBI computer files like they did earlier to look at Selina's criminal record.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

#nobanenoway

#talialovesbane

 

[Snow Queen]

Or Alfred was able to hack into CIA or FBI computer files like they did earlier to look at Selina's criminal record.

Which is what it says in the script, if memory serves.