The Dark Knight Rises Why Batman WON'T Die in The Dark Knight Rises

[DoomsdayApex]

It's a simple choice. I respect what Nolan has done with the character so far... but killing him off is taking things too far.

IMHO.

I'm sure I'll rent it.. but no way would I pay ticket prices to see it.

Then why are you here? It's obvious that Nolan is going to end this trilogy in a unconventional manner which involves Batman dying. So why waste your time any further?

Oh really? Prove that I'm wrong about WB's history of potraying DC heroes on the big screen. They've screwed Superman so bad nobody is excited about his reboot. Green Lantern was laughed off the screen.

The idiots at WB tried to destroy Nolan's franchise by pushing Lenardo DiCaprio to play the riddler in the final film. Trying to duplicate what was already seen with the Joker.

Killing off Batman is STUPID and it wouldn't surprise me at all if the people at WB were behind something so stupid.

http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/movie-talk/leonardo-dicaprio-sought-riddler-role-173651296.html

Actually slick, WB has been against the idea of Batman being killed off since the start (according to our insiders). I suggest you look through TDKReturns, especially considering the novel was probably used as inspiration for Nolan's final movie.

WB tried to convince Nolan to convert TDKR to 3D, and cast DiCaprio as The Riddler. Nolan refused and WB accepted the outcome. So please, just stop.

 

[Naked Shia]

This is so funny. People are always ranting against happy ending, but as soon as an unconventional ending seems to be happening, they are against it.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

Yep, some fans just have to accept that whatever the ending is it's Nolan's interpretation.

 

[Gianakin_]

I like happy endings.

 

[Naked Shia]

I like them too, but I can accept whatever ending a director throw at me, as long as it's good and it makes sense in the context of the story.

 

[Greens]

The fact that some people even refuse to see the movie because of the ending baffles me.

 

[Gianakin_]

No, not happy ends. Happy endings.

 

[Naked Shia]

The fact that some people even refuse to see the movie because of the ending baffles me.

This and the fact that some people are not even able to accept a different kind of ending is laughable.

 

[DaveMoral]

I'd rather not see that in these movies. And as for the age and years, I particularly find it a very interesting challenge that's been met by the approach to these films in terms of really looking at Wayne's mortality in ways that other versions and formats don't quite match. Now...some may say that's not what these stories should do...they shouldn't remind us that we're mortal, or that we will age and die and not be forever young and virile like superheroes. We get enough of that in real life, we want escapism in our comics and superheroes, etc. There's a lot of merit in that, but I'm willing to go along with Nolan's version as well because more than anything I like how the films are doing it. I don't generally want to see Batman age or die any more than the next person, but I don't mind entertaining the idea as an elseworld's take in the vision of a good storyteller if it accentuates the preciousness of the time he IS Batman.

I embraced the possibility of death or retirement when it was revealed the film was set 8 year after TDK. However, it's increasingly seeming that those 8 years were a total absence of Batman. Which I think sucks, and renders the idea that age and injury are taking their toll somewhat moot. If he hasn't been running around as the Batman for these 8 years, but instead been out of the game... this really shouldn't be as much of an issue. It's more an issue of him letting himself get out of shape than the toll of time.

He'd be going on 40, sure, but there's no reason that he shouldn't be able to be just as close to his prime after putting in the training time to get back in shape and hone his skills again as he was when he was 31-32 and disappeared from the scene. It would be old if he had an accumulation of injuries, age and stress from constant activity for 8 years... but I just don't see it that way if he hasn't been active. Not knowing what people can do in real life with getting into shape and making amazing physical accomplishments into their 40s. Professional athletes and fighters retire after the age of 40 primarily because they have been constantly active and damaging themselves. Some people go from being totally out of shape to doing Ironman or other such competitions into their 40s and surpassing their younger competitors.

So I'm not as interested in explore the effects of age and wear and tear if Bruce has simply been a reclusive Bruce Wayne with Batman MIA for those 8 years. I'm much more interested in that angle if he's been mostly active as Batman for that time period and taking the punishment that goes along with it.

 

[Naked Shia]

I would tend to agree, but I also think he'll be caught off guard. When he returns in action, after several years of inactivity, there is no way that he's ready for the fight. Like you said, training would help him to get in shape, but he won't have time to train at first. Because Bane will already be here, and he'll need to go into action right at that moment.

 

[uniqueweasel]

As long as it is a clear cut ending, and not a sort of Inception open ender, and fits with the rest of the story, as i'm sure it will, it will be fine. If he goes out though I want him to go out in a truly Batman way, saving the city completley and restoring his honour as the legend of Gotham.

 

[cobrastatus]

THE LEGEND ENDS. Batman Lives.

 

[The_Raganork]

THE LEGEND ENDS. Batman Lives.

This is groundbreaking proof!

 

[Naked Shia]

Rag is ready to slay some trolls!

 

[The_Raganork]

This entire thread is ridiculous honestly. Anyone claiming to have proof that Batman Can or that Batman Will die is foolish.

It's a possibility, put on your big boy pans, get the **** over it and accept that you and your opinions are not the know all be all of Batman.

 

[Naked Shia]

It's a thread made out of fear....

 

[KalMart]

I embraced the possibility of death or retirement when it was revealed the film was set 8 year after TDK. However, it's increasingly seeming that those 8 years were a total absence of Batman. Which I think sucks, and renders the idea that age and injury are taking their toll somewhat moot. If he hasn't been running around as the Batman for these 8 years, but instead been out of the game... this really shouldn't be as much of an issue. It's more an issue of him letting himself get out of shape than the toll of time.

It is if you're out of practice. Just like anything that's very athletic or demanding, the body has to keep it going to stay accustomed to it. When a football player who's spent his life. eve close to the last 17 years straight playing football, misses just a season with an injury, it's tough getting back eve after healing. You can actually make yourself more susceptible to more injury. Eight years off fort something like this is huge.

He'd be going on 40, sure, but there's no reason that he shouldn't be able to be just as close to his prime after putting in the training time to get back in shape and hone his skills again as he was when he was 31-32 and disappeared from the scene. It would be old if he had an accumulation of injuries, age and stress from constant activity for 8 years... but I just don't see it that way if he hasn't been active. Not knowing what people can do in real life with getting into shape and making amazing physical accomplishments into their 40s. Professional athletes and fighters retire after the age of 40 primarily because they have been constantly active and damaging themselves. Some people go from being totally out of shape to doing Ironman or other such competitions into their 40s and surpassing their younger competitors.

Well, it seems that he basically does get back 'in the game'...if a little rusty at first then back again more in-form later. But again, the toll that constant athletic impact takes over the years is also what keeps them going during those years. And a 40 yr old would find it even harder to get back into it than a 30 yr old with the same time off.

So I'm not as interested in explore the effects of age and wear and tear if Bruce has simply been a reclusive Bruce Wayne with Batman MIA for those 8 years. I'm much more interested in that angle if he's been mostly active as Batman for that time period and taking the punishment that goes along with it.

I realize how you feel, but it looks like they have a different take on the story that they're telling. I mean, no Batman or Superhero story would just jump eight years...especially prime physical years...if it wasn't important to the story that those eight years were a hiatus. I realize that some folks don't want a 'dose of reality' in their superhero stories, as in that's not what they read/watch them for, to be reminded of their own mortality or human limitations. I know for some Batfans there's a major WTF to the idea of being Batman for a year or so, then not for eight years, then once more for a short time.

But this is something that these writers and filmmakers have chosen, so the best I can suggest is to just roll with is as an alternative/elseworlds take that still emphasizes what Batman is all about in a non-traditional way. Maybe Batman dies in this one...but even if he does, it's just one version and won't necessarily mean he'll have to die in the comics, obviously. I have a feeling that if you keep yourself open to it, you'll enjoy this version and the finality to it as a self-contained story.....and hopefully not resent it for that, either.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

That will lead to chaos

 

[KalMart]

Chaos leads to fear...

 

[The_Raganork]

Fear leads to more stupid ******** threads like this one.

 

[MechaOrga]

whatsgoingoninhere.jpg


Nolan is going to end his interpretation of Bruce Wayne's Story.

In this film, we have our hero come back after getting NEARLY killed by the movies villain and defeat said villain.

I don't think, from a story telling point of view, that killing off the hero at the end of the film is a great decision. Nolan and his team of Goyer and Jonah, I'm sure are aware of this. Which is why i don't think he is going to do it.

Will "Batman" sacrifice himself for the grater good, possibly against the "bomb"? will he end the legend/face of batman and reveal who he is to the police that are following him into battle during the climatic city hall battle("I haven't given them everything...not yet")?

Looks like it.

However if anybody actually thinks BRUCE WAYNE is going to straight up die, Let me put it this way: he starts the film in a bad place, gets to a worse place in his first fight with Bane, gets thrown in Hell on Earth, even worse place, escapes and Comes back and defeats Bane only to die at the end of the film?

There are "unconventional ways" to end the bruce wayne batman story that doesnt involve REAL DEATH of the character we've been following since part 1.

 

[The_Raganork]

whatsgoingoninhere.jpg


Nolan is going to end his interpretation of Bruce Wayne's Story.

In this film, we have our hero come back after getting NEARLY killed by the movies villain and defeat said villain.

I don't think, from a story telling point of view, that killing off the hero at the end of the film is a great decision. Nolan and his team of Goyer and Jonah, I'm sure are aware of this. Which is why i don't think he is going to do it.

Will "Batman" sacrifice himself for the grater good, possibly against the "bomb"? will he end the legend/face of batman and reveal who he is to the police that are following him into battle during the climatic city hall battle("I haven't given them everything...not yet")?

Looks like it.

However if anybody actually thinks BRUCE WAYNE is going to straight up die, Let me put it this way: he starts the film in a bad place, gets to a worse place in his first fight with Bane, gets thrown in Hell on Earth, even worse place, escapes and Comes back and defeats Bane only to die at the end of the film?

There are "unconventional ways" to end the bruce wayne batman story that doesnt involve REAL DEATH of the character we've been following since part 1.

You're deeply oversimplifying it.

I can do that to.

You think Harvey Dent is going to be Bruce's hope, go through hell become Two-Face, one of the most famous Batman villains ever and then die

Death is not assured in any way but it's definitely a choice.

Thomas = Hero of Gotham = Killed

Harvey = Hero of Gotham = Killed

The pattern is there, Gotham works in a circular way, we're seeing that. Doesn't mean Batman is unsuccessful at the end just means that he realizes that there's something greater Batman can do than just save the day. That Gotham is at it's worse and even if he saves it from Bane it still suffers the ability to collapse and die and to keep that from happening they need a "dramatic example" and in the past the death of their hero has always galvanized them to do good.

He may not be in the position to choose whether his death is phony or real. He's not all powerful he will be at the whim of Bane's amazing and deadly in this film.

From a storytelling standpoint Killing Batman can work and if anyone tells you that it's bad from a standpoint is not looking deep enough into how to tell a story in a effective and new way.

No one is saying he has to die, this thread purposely negates death as a possibility, there is absolutely no defending such foolery.

 

[KalMart]

Fear leads to more stupid ******** threads like this one.

Threads....lead to suffering...

 

[MechaOrga]

You're deeply oversimplifying it.

I can do that to.

You think Harvey Dent is going to be Bruce's hope, go through hell become Two-Face, one of the most famous Batman villains ever and then die

Death is not assured in any way but it's definitely a choice.

Thomas = Hero of Gotham = Killed

Harvey = Hero of Gotham = Killed

The pattern is there, Gotham works in a circular way, we're seeing that. Doesn't mean Batman is unsuccessful at the end just means that he realizes that there's something greater Batman can do than just save the day. That Gotham is at it's worse and even if he saves it from Bane it still suffers the ability to collapse and die and to keep that from happening they need a "dramatic example" and in the past the death of their hero has always galvanized them to do good.

He may not be in the position to choose whether his death is phony or real. He's not all powerful he will be at the whim of Bane's amazing and deadly in this film.

From a storytelling standpoint Killing Batman can work and if anyone tells you that it's bad from a standpoint is not looking deep enough into how to tell a story in a effective and new way.

No one is saying he has to die, this thread purposely negates death as a possibility, there is absolutely no defending such foolery.

I agree with your points Rag as usual and of course REAL DEATH is an option but:

Thomas and Harvey do not = Bruce.

Bane will be an unstoppable force for 3/4 of the film but in the end he will be another villain defeated.

I think there will be a "Death of Batman Persona" but i dont think that equals = Bruce dead

I have a certain view because i work at a large TV network in creative, so the audience is always in mind

 

[DaveMoral]

It is if you're out of practice. Just like anything that's very athletic or demanding, the body has to keep it going to stay accustomed to it. When a football player who's spent his life. eve close to the last 17 years straight playing football, misses just a season with an injury, it's tough getting back eve after healing. You can actually make yourself more susceptible to more injury. Eight years off fort something like this is huge.


Well, it seems that he basically does get back 'in the game'...if a little rusty at first then back again more in-form later. But again, the toll that constant athletic impact takes over the years is also what keeps them going during those years. And a 40 yr old would find it even harder to get back into it than a 30 yr old with the same time off.


I realize how you feel, but it looks like they have a different take on the story that they're telling. I mean, no Batman or Superhero story would just jump eight years...especially prime physical years...if it wasn't important to the story that those eight years were a hiatus. I realize that some folks don't want a 'dose of reality' in their superhero stories, as in that's not what they read/watch them for, to be reminded of their own mortality or human limitations. I know for some Batfans there's a major WTF to the idea of being Batman for a year or so, then not for eight years, then once more for a short time.

But this is something that these writers and filmmakers have chosen, so the best I can suggest is to just roll with is as an alternative/elseworlds take that still emphasizes what Batman is all about in a non-traditional way. Maybe Batman dies in this one...but even if he does, it's just one version and won't necessarily mean he'll have to die in the comics, obviously. I have a feeling that if you keep yourself open to it, you'll enjoy this version and the finality to it as a self-contained story.....and hopefully not resent it for that, either.

I'm open to whatever. I just find the idea of age and injury less appealing if the injury he's carrying is from 8 years previous. It seems so unlike Bruce Wayne, to me, to let an injury from a gunshot wound and a fall from a 2 story height to keep him down for 8 years. 8 years that, while there's a deliberate attempt on the part of Gotham City government to root out and stamp out crime, would surely not be immediately peaceful to the point that the Batman is not needed. I could see him being out of the game for up to 3 years prior to TDKR and the 5 years immediately after TDK has him retreating to the shadows more akin to what he was doing throughout BB and presumably the intervening time period between BB and TDK. I just don't see Bruce letting it go that willingly or easily, because even though he's looking for an endgame I find it hard to believe that just the death of Dent galvanized the city enough that they it has zero need of the Batman.

I still have hope that he was active to some degree, with the "stuck in time" reference and the whole idea of the toll of age and wear and tear being a theme that suggests to me that he was active after TDK. Even if by the start of the film he's been absent for some time, the idea that the whole Dent Act thing is really just wallpaper over the cracks and that Gotham is still rotting deeply from the inside. I don't think Batman would be fooled by that and short of the accumulation of injuries and the more severe criminal threats petering off enough that he felt Gordon and the authorities could handle things without him would have him quitting.

We'll see. All I can say is that with a MIA Batman for 8 years my first reaction is that wear and tear, age aspect of the story becomes inherently less interesting to me if Bruce Wayne hasn't been going out at night for so long. Then it becomes more of a matter of "I'm out of the swing of things" rather than "I was forced to retire by government and the increasing inability of my body to handle the stress."