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

[The_Raganork]

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

Thomas and Harvey do not = Bruce.

Sure they do. If anything the past films have proven they have.

Thomas is the man Bruce failed to come back as. His father's son, the lost son of Gotham. In TDKR that man will come back.

Harvey is what Bruce was threatening to become. A good man consumed by a monster created by death, anger and loss.

They're all extensions of Bruce in some way.

Bruce is just a man at the end of the day, nothing more, nothing less. That is why he has failed in the past, he really thinks he's something else other than a man but he can't be. He'll always be a man but in that there are great things he can do.

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

This almost has nothing to do with Batman dying. Bane isn't someone whose chips are all in on his physical ability, though confident he has a back-up plan. His initial plan is all or nothing.

He gets its all or he reduces all into nothing.

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

Which is fine but it's a very real possibility. Nothing from this film, TDK or BB actually forbids Bruce from really dying. (in fact some of the previous films suggest it will happen one day)

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

Which is fine but Nolan's audience is already created, this is the end not the beginning. A reboot will come later that is divorced from this. This is about finishing the story the way Nolan, Nolan and Goyer want to end it. Something they believe will be satisfying and the audience will find satisfying.

Not cropping out their creative ideas because they're afraid a couple of people won't be mature enough to handle doing something big and different for this film.

 

[KalMart]

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."

That could be their hook, though. Starting off with a less-appealing premise...one that's less appealing for Wayne as well. So much the better for him to pull himself back up by his bootstraps and make one last comeback. We're not supposed to find the time off enjoyable, so to speak. It's supposed to be un-hero-like and detrimental to him, something he wishes he could get back and all.

But yeah, it makes most sense story-wise, that he was absent for the vast majority of the eight years. A longer, less active absence sets up the return that much better.

 

[Norek]

It's not about whether or not he dies, it's about getting a satisfying ending to the whole trilogy. That can be done either way.

 

[MechaOrga]

Sure they do. If anything the past films have proven they have.

Thomas is the man Bruce failed to come back as. His father's son, the lost son of Gotham. In TDKR that man will come back.

Harvey is what Bruce was threatening to become. A good man consumed by a monster created by death, anger and loss.

They're all extensions of Bruce in some way.

Bruce is just a man at the end of the day, nothing more, nothing less. That is why he has failed in the past, he really thinks he's something else other than a man but he can't be. He'll always be a man but in that there are great things he can do.



This almost has nothing to do with Batman dying. Bane isn't someone whose chips are all in on his physical ability, though confident he has a back-up plan. His initial plan is all or nothing.

He gets its all or he reduces all into nothing.





Which is fine but it's a very real possibility. Nothing from this film, TDK or BB actually forbids Bruce from really dying. (in fact some of the previous films suggest it will happen one day)



Which is fine but Nolan's audience is already created, this is the end not the beginning. A reboot will come later that is divorced from this. This is about finishing the story the way Nolan, Nolan and Goyer want to end it. Something they believe will be satisfying and the audience will find satisfying.

Not cropping out their creative ideas because they're afraid a couple of people won't be mature enough to handle doing something big and different for this film.

that is a very poetic answer but I must have missed the film where Thomas and Dent are the main characters and not just characters that Bruce and the audience learn from

Just because they died, doesn't mean that bruce will NEED to die like them and be part of the gotham cycle of limping on in peace for a few years because then thats all it will amount to: Batman Dying and creating a "good gotham" but only for x amount of years.

Because of their death and the way they are marketing Batman ending/dying, I'm a firm believe that nolan WILL NOT go this way.

Bane and the bad guys will be defeated in grand fashion (since this is the end of the trilogy). Nolan ended film two with the villain essentially winning in a way, so i don't think he will do it twice. (Bane's back up plan that you mentioned will probably be the "bomb" that Bat's must affix to the batplane and fly off with it thus ending in a spectacular explosion most likely)

But let me reiterate that YES you can have a conclusion to ANY heroic story /trilogy here the character dies, I just DONT think it will be this one

i guess in other words, i don't think TDKR will end like Johnson's Captain America.

 

[The_Raganork]

that is a very poetic answer but I must have missed the film where Thomas and Dent are the main characters and not just characters that Bruce and the audience learn from

A parallel is a parallel. It's there for a reason.

Just because they died, doesn't mean that bruce will NEED to die like them and be part of the gotham cycle of limping on in peace for a few years because then thats all it will amount to: Batman Dying and creating a "good gotham" but only for x amount of years.

No one is suggesting he needs to die. I'm saying. He could die. It's an option and there are actual things in the previous films that lend credence to this possibility.

Because of their death and the way they are marketing Batman ending/dying, I'm a firm believe that nolan WILL NOT go this way.

Reverse, reverse psychology. People were convinced Rachel doesn't die because we saw Joker throw her out a window.

Bane and the bad guys will be defeated in grand fashion (since this is the end of the trilogy). Nolan ended film two with the villain essentially winning in a way, so i don't think he will do it twice. (Bane's back up plan that you mentioned will probably be the "bomb" that Bat's must affix to the batplane and fly off with it thus ending in a spectacular explosion most likely)

Still oversimplifying it. If Batman sacrifices himself for Gotham it can be told in a way that makes that the biggest defeat for Bane, not Batman. It's not that hard.

But let me reiterate that YES you can have a conclusion to ANY heroic story /trilogy here the character dies, I just DONT think it will be this one

i guess in other words, i don't think TDKR will end like Johnson's Captain America.

That's fine. I don't think anyone should believe one over the other but if they do that's fine. Just lets not play along with this silly notion that Batman/Bruce can't really die.

Because he can.

 

[filmboy33]

This is a debate I have participated in for a long time, not only on here but also with friends as well. When Nolan declared that this was, indeed, his last Batman film, the media and fans started to immediately speculate that Batman would die in this film. It is an easy leap to make.

If you step back for a second and really look at what Nolan has said in the media about the film and his intentions, I think the ending of this film is pretty obvious. First, Nolan has said he does not want anyone else to make a film in his universe. Second, Nolan has stated this is his last Batman film and he has no desire to revisit this world again. Third, he has been quoted as saying that TDKR ends Bruce's story in a complete and satisfying way.

Now we add what has been reported in the media or from other sources. One website reported some time ago that Nolan ends TDKR in a very tragic way, Shakespearean was a word used to describe the ending. Then recently you had Goyer state to Empire that the ending to the film is very unconventional and gutsy.

What kind of an ending allows Nolan to definitely close the door on this series, denying anyone else the chance to make a film in this universe, while also being tragic, unconventional and gutsy? The death of Bruce Wayne.

Yes, I said Bruce Wayne and not Batman. This series is Bruce Wayne's story and not Batman's. Nolan has said so himself plenty of times in countless interviews. Being such, then the only logical way to end Bruce's story is for him to die, to sacrifice himself for the city he loves. He dies as Batman, but that does not mean that Batman perishes with him.

Bruce intended for Batman to be a symbol. A symbol is bigger than any one man.

Let's look at the title of the film for a moment shall we? The Dark Knight Rises. Yes, this title could relate to Bruce being beaten by Bane and reaching his lowest point. Then, through sheer will, rising to fight Bane again and being victorious. This actually ties into Ra's speech to Bruce in BB on the ice in relation to his father. Ra's states that Bruce's training means nothing and that it is his will that is the key. "Training is nothing, Will is everything!" I think Nolan is playing off this same note throughout the series as we see Bruce's sheer will continually allowing him to rise up and defeat the threats to the city. His training did not defeat the Joker, his will and determination did. But I am getting off topic.

I think the title actually refers to Bruce falling (dying) and The Dark Knight rising. I would place my money on Nolan having it both ways with his ending. We will see Bruce's Batman die in the film, I have no doubt about that. But, I also feel the last shot of the film will be Batman standing over the city, still its protector. In fact, I think Nolan has already shown us the ending to the film in the trailers. That shot of Batman looking at the city in the morning light could be the new Batman and not Bruce's Batman.

I feel Nolan will leave the identity of this new Dark Knight a mystery. He will simply show this new Batman watching Gotham and then Bam fade to black and then The Dark Knight Rises comes across the screen. That seems to be a way to be unconventional and to close the door on this universe. No filmmaker is gonna want pick up the story of the new Batman. Be it John Blake, as many have speculated, or someone else (Selina Kyle perhaps). Plus it establishes that Bruce accomplished what he set out to do- which was to make The Dark Knight a legend and a symbol. It allows us fans to imagine new adventures for the new Batman while not requiring those adventures to be filmed.

Plus, consider the fact that the end of the film takes place in winter. I know it is on the nose, but Nolan isn't affraid to be on the nose sometimes. Winter is always been used to symbolize death. It will be used here to that effect as well.

Anyway, I welcome any debate on this theory from any and all.

 

[KalMart]

I dont think he'll end it in tragedy because the writers actually care for Bruce Wayne too much,....which is what leads me to believe he won't die, even though dying could be a workable end. Or, if there is a death, it isn't in vain...i.e. not tragic.

It seems to me this is a story in which the writers want Wayne to let go of Batman and not have it devour him, for Bruce to finally feel that Batman has done his part successfully, and live to enjoy the rewards as a citizen....to live a happy life that he's earned. If tat somehow also includes his actual death, we'll see...but not an actual downer/tragedy of an ending with unfulfilled potential or goals unreached, etc.

Either way...no, no 'new' Batman. They're going to end this story as a story about Bruce Wayne's Batman and only Bruce Wayne....no more anyone's Batman in that story if it ends that way.

 

[filmboy33]

I dont think he'll end it in tragedy because the writers actually care for Bruce Wayne too much,....which is what leads me to believe he won't die, even though dying could be a workable end. Or, if there is a death, it isn't in vain...i.e. not tragic.

It seems to me this is a story in which the writers want Wayne to let go of Batman and not have it devour him, for Bruce to finally feel that Batman has done his part successfully, and live to enjoy the rewards as a citizen....to live a happy life that he's earned. If tat somehow also includes his actual death, we'll see...but not an actual downer/tragedy of an ending with unfulfilled potential or goals unreached, etc.

Either way...no, no 'new' Batman. They're going to end this story as a story about Bruce Wayne's Batman and only Bruce Wayne....no more anyone's Batman in that story if it ends that way.

I suppose you could have the people of Gotham believe Batman dead but have Bruce survive. Then he quietly goes into a retirement, turning the city over to the ordinary citizens, symbolized in the person of John Blake.

Rag posted something similar to this over in the other general speculation thread and I hated it. But it does not mean it is not possible.

I do like the idea of Bruce being able to let go of the monster and return to being a normal citizen, much like a soldier returning home after a long war abroad. It does tie into the ideas of the series about Bruce's constant struggle to find his true self and let go of the guilt and pain that seek to destroy him emotionally and mentally. It is a satisfying ending I can admit.

I just prefer Bruce to sacrifice himself and the people of Gotham knowing their crown prince was The Dark Knight all along and sacrificed himself for the city. It does what no previous Batman story has done on film, which is reveal Bruce as Batman and also soldifies Batman as a legend.

Who knows honestly at this point. Nolan and all involved have done an amazing job keeping details of this film under wraps for this long. I think I am personally coming to the point where coming on here will no longer be wise.

 

[KalMart]

I suppose you could have the people of Gotham believe Batman dead but have Bruce survive. Then he quietly goes into a retirement, turning the city over to the ordinary citizens, symbolized in the person of John Blake.

That I see as more likely.

Rag posted something similar to this over in the other general speculation thread and I hated it. But it does not mean it is not possible.

I do like the idea of Bruce being able to let go of the monster and return to being a normal citizen, much like a soldier returning home after a long war abroad. It does tie into the ideas of the series about Bruce's constant struggle to find his true self and let go of the guilt and pain that seek to destroy him emotionally and mentally. It is a satisfying ending I can admit.

I just prefer Bruce to sacrifice himself and the people of Gotham knowing their crown prince was The Dark Knight all along and sacrificed himself for the city. It does what no previous Batman story has done on film, which is reveal Bruce as Batman and also soldifies Batman as a legend.

Who knows honestly at this point. Nolan and all involved have done an amazing job keeping details of this film under wraps for this long. I think I am personally coming to the point where coming on here will no longer be wise.

I think a 'heroic death' is an effective (and some feel overused) narrative convention. But I see an extra level of maturity and sophistication with these storytellers that are stressing the personal and moral costs of things....treating Bruce Wayne as if it were one of their friends or relatives, with some genuine concerns over their well-being and future. So in that respect, it's like making a difference and/or helping someone that you care about by not letting a character 'die in the ring', so to speak....even if it were a win. I think it's very bold for a superhero movie to do this in such a fashion....to take he ultimate stance that one is eventually better off without being that hero. Albeit, once a goal has been achieved.

 

[KalMart]

On the other hand, I can see how incorporating he may want to incorporate a 'faked' death if his identity is revealed. And in so many ways..his identity should be revealed to the people of Gotham. They should know that the most privileged and insulated of Gotham's son devoted his life and health to making Gotham a better place for them.

I this way, it might turn out that he was wrong in BB when he said as a man he can be corruptible and have more value as a symbol. The fact that a man can be corruptible and weak...but still ISN'T...could be what really counts most. That he perseveres and gives what he has t those who don't. Maybe that will ultimately and ironically reenforce why he's a real hero...because he is a real mortal man and chose the better path.

An orchestrated death could help him avoid dealing with the revealed identity...but maybe it's better that he does live to deal with that. Like Tony Stark but in a more serious and consequential way. That could be Wayne's final big challenge....to leave himself to the true judgment of Gotham, to face charges of vigilantism, his responsibility over copycats, and defend his actions in the open.

If Bruce Wayne were given the chance in a court to say something on his own behalf, defending his decision and actions to become Batman....wouldn't you like to hear that?

 

[filmboy33]

On the other hand, I can see how incorporating he may want to incorporate a 'faked' death if his identity is revealed. And in so many ways..his identity should be revealed to the people of Gotham. They should know that the most privileged and insulated of Gotham's son devoted his life and health to making Gotham a better place for them.

I this way, it might turn out that he was wrong in BB when he said as a man he can be corruptible and have more value as a symbol. The fact that a man can be corruptible and weak...but still ISN'T...could be what really counts most. That he perseveres and gives what he has t those who don't. Maybe that will ultimately and ironically reenforce why he's a real hero...because he is a real mortal man and chose the better path.

An orchestrated death could help him avoid dealing with the revealed identity...but maybe it's better that he does live to deal with that. Like Tony Stark but in a more serious and consequential way. That could be Wayne's final big challenge....to leave himself to the true judgment of Gotham, to face charges of vigilantism, his responsibility over copycats, and defend his actions in the open.

If Bruce Wayne were given the chance in a court to say something on his own behalf, defending his decision and actions to become Batman....wouldn't you like to hear that?

I still believe Bruce will be revealed as Batman before TDKR ends. It will be done on the most public of stages and will work against Bane's class warfare propoganda.

As far as a fake death. I see this also as a distinct possibility. However, the fake death is much more effective if the people of Gotham do not know Bruce was Batman. Which in my opinion makes the film weaker overall.

I do like your idea of Bruce being revealed and then having to face the consequences of his actions as Batman at the hands of the city he defended. I wonder if he would be pardoned of all actions by the Mayor and able to then live a normal life as a citizen. But then we come back to realism and the truth is he would be a target by all the criminals he locked up who seek retribution. Bruce would really never be safe unless he went into hiding. Which could happen as well.

As much as I was against the "Bruce survivies" argument, the more I think about it and the paths that can be taken with it the more I am coming around.

 

[J.Howlett]

I still believe Bruce will be revealed as Batman before TDKR ends. It will be done on the most public of stages and will work against Bane's class warfare propoganda.

This. It's the only way I see Batman being able to stand side by side with GCPD in the climax of the picture. It's how the City galvanizes itself to fight back against Bane...

 

[KalMart]

I still believe Bruce will be revealed as Batman before TDKR ends. It will be done on the most public of stages and will work against Bane's class warfare propoganda.

As far as a fake death. I see this also as a distinct possibility. However, the fake death is much more effective if the people of Gotham do not know Bruce was Batman. Which in my opinion makes the film weaker overall.

I do like your idea of Bruce being revealed and then having to face the consequences of his actions as Batman at the hands of the city he defended. I wonder if he would be pardoned of all actions by the Mayor and able to then live a normal life as a citizen. But then we come back to realism and the truth is he would be a target by all the criminals he locked up who seek retribution. Bruce would really never be safe unless he went into hiding. Which could happen as well.

As much as I was against the "Bruce survivies" argument, the more I think about it and the paths that can be taken with it the more I am coming around.

I disagree...I think what would make a death most poignant and meaningful is if the people DO know that a son of Gotham who could have led the easiest of lives decided to take on the greatest of difficulties to protect them and help ensure a better future. They SHUOLD know it was Wayne, and what he gave up for them.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Maybe the film ends with Bruce being in confinement for all the laws he's broken as Batman. His prison buddy: a lean, pale man with a Glasgow smile, sharing the same padded cell forever. ZOMFG!!!!!

 

[KalMart]

Maybe the film ends with Bruce being in confinement for all the laws he's broken as Batman. His prison buddy: a lean, pale man with a Glasgow smile, sharing the same padded cell forever. ZOMFG!!!!!

Or it ends with a very young boy waking up abruptly in his very fancy bedroom...he then rushes downstairs weeping, to hug his parents and tell them that he doesn't want to go to the opera...they smile and say okay....



The End

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Or it ends with Bruce dying trying to neutralize the bomb, only to wake up with Morpheus saying, "welcome to the real world."

 

[KalMart]

Or in concert.

 

[Benstamania]

Then why are you her e? 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?



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.

Because it's a public forum.. I stated an opinion.. Which I'm allowed to do.

But every damn time I go any further from the game forums I'm instantly reminded why I don't bother going to other parts of the Hype anymore.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

Because it's a public forum.. I stated an opinion.. Which I'm allowed to do.

But every damn time I go any further from the game forums I'm instantly reminded why I don't bother going to other parts of the Hype anymore.

You can state your opinion, but by coming in here and saying (paraphrasing):

"Gee, if Batman is killed off, I won't pay money for a ticket. It's not worth it"

You're sort of asking for other posters to question your reasoning and logic. 'Do you know how incredibly 'fanboyish' that sounds? Get over yourself.'

 

[The_Raganork]

Because it's a public forum.. I stated an opinion.. Which I'm allowed to do.

But every damn time I go any further from the game forums I'm instantly reminded why I don't bother going to other parts of the Hype anymore.

Don't play this Bull**** you said something extremely close minded and stupid and someone called you out on it.

If you plan to skip a movie because you don't like the way the end sounds (because you've spoiled it for yourself) then not only do you not have a respect and knowledge of what it is to enjoy a story that you yourself didn't like but you also don't understand the concept of going to the movies.

You don't pick what movies you're going to see based off the endings. You go to see the films FOR the endings.

This incredibly stuck-up close minded idea that you yourself have some ownership over Batman and any story that doesn't do exactly what you want it to suddenly warrants you some kind of opinion of merit is silly.

You are allowed to have your opinion but that doesn't mean that your opinion is respectable, smart or drawn from a good basis, so when you say something based on nothing other than sheer stupidity and entitlement expect someone from that forum with half a brain to ask you why the hell you're in the forum in the first place if your waiting to see a film that does EXACTLY what you dictate.


Go make your own damn Batman film then.

 

[KalMart]

Because it's a public forum.. I stated an opinion.. Which I'm allowed to do.

But every damn time I go any further from the game forums I'm instantly reminded why I don't bother going to other parts of the Hype anymore.

I'm going to try to take the high road here by saying I understand how you feel, but I would recommend that you let yourself be open to an alternative 'angle' at these things, as opposed to a critical deconstruction or dismissal of the core makeup of Batman. Certainly, the big-screen experience of it is something worth watching in and of itself. Like if this was my story or film, I'd very much want you, as a comic fan, to 'hear me out' on it, and to hopefully appreciate the craftsmanship with which I take a different spin on it.

I mean that sincerely, and I hope it at least makes some sense.

 

[C. Lee]

Don't play this Bull**** you said something extremely close minded and stupid and someone called you out on it.

If you plan to skip a movie because you don't like the way the end sounds (because you've spoiled it for yourself) then not only do you not have a respect and knowledge of what it is to enjoy a story that you yourself didn't like but you also don't understand the concept of going to the movies.

You don't pick what movies you're going to see based off the endings. You go to see the films FOR the endings.

This incredibly stuck-up close minded idea that you yourself have some ownership over Batman and any story that doesn't do exactly what you want it to suddenly warrants you some kind of opinion of merit is silly.

You are allowed to have your opinion but that doesn't mean that your opinion is respectable, smart or drawn from a good basis, so when you say something based on nothing other than sheer stupidity and entitlement expect someone from that forum with half a brain to ask you why the hell you're in the forum in the first place if your waiting to see a film that does EXACTLY what you dictate.


Go make your own damn Batman film then.

You've been talked to and warned about this overbearing attitude towards people who have a different opinion than you do in the past. Take some time off to really think about it this time.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Because it's a public forum.. I stated an opinion.. Which I'm allowed to do.

But every damn time I go any further from the game forums I'm instantly reminded why I don't bother going to other parts of the Hype anymore.

I just have to ask. If you don't like going to other parts, why go to the Batforums?

 

[Boom]

Well this thread took a hostile turn.

Honestly, if Benstamania has no interest in a Batman movie where Batman is killed off in the end, that's entirely his right.

 

[Nevincer]

You used to be swarmed, ridiculed and made out as if you worshipped Satan here if you proposed the idea Batman die at the end of this film a couple year agos. I'm not defending Rag's outburst but having to read this linear thinking over and over again I can see where the emotion comes from. At any rate you shouldn't be attacked for voicing your opinion, especially when it regards ones own choices. The fact that benstamania went about it more eloquently, I don't think that type of response should have been reserved for him, his tone wasn't trollish or confrontational in nature at all.