The Dark Knight Rises Why is everyone slamming TDKR?

[Clerk]

Ah, 24 Season 3 good times

Yeah, I mean I hear you, Rachel gets brought up a few times, but I just think the distinction between him quitting being Batman and him quitting being Bruce Wayne was there.

I guess to some extent, with such a large passage of time, Bruce is sort of like a new character in this film. We have to play a little emotional catchup with him during the first act. I can understand why some were put off by that, but for me it kept things fresh and I really sympathized with his character without the movie ever really feeling like it was trying to shove it down my throat. Considering the way things went down in TDK, I always expected Bruce to be in a pretty bad state at the start of the third film. They just did it in a way differently than I expected, which is what I like as an audience member. Give me what I want/expect, but with a curveball.



Well, Rachel's letter never said "Gotham will always need Batman". It said, "Now I'm sure the day won't come that you don't need Batman." And TDKR was true to that, Bruce was forced into retirement but he still had the need for Batman. Which is the reason Rachel rejected him, she knew he had become a shell of himself.

I totally get why it's something that would piss off a lot of fans, but I think Nolan covered his tracks pretty well. It wasn't a contradiction, just playing against expectations.

Awww Yisss, Season 3 of 24 baby. Good man.

You're definitely right about the "new character" thing, and I think that's a "it either worked for you or it didn't" type argument. For example, I was foaming at the mouth about Alfred after I first saw TDKR. My reaction was, "Wait, we spent all of TDK watching him convince Bruce to be Batman, and now he's in tears begging him to quit going out?" My friend looked at me and said, "It's been 8 years dude, people change." For some, that was kinda hard to swallow in terms of cinema, others were fine.

As I stated before, Nolan = balls. I love having my expectations turned around, that's why Metal Gear Solid is my favorite gaming franchise. The creator could just give us the same game every year, but instead he mixes things up- MGS2 you dont play as Snake but Rookie Raiden, MGS3 you play as Snake's father, MGS4 you play as Old Snake, etc. MGS3 and MGS4 I love, but MGS2 Raiden didn't click with me. I can see what the creator was trying to do, but just didn't work. The same thing kinda applies with TDKR to myself. That's always a risk with a curveball, others like yourself will catch it, some like me will miss it.

You're right about the TDK letter, I think I was talking in terms of Rachel motive. When I first saw TDK, the message I got from it was kinda a Batman... Forever (oh God) vibe. So when Rachel told Bruce in BB "this is your mask," the letter to me interpreted she was continuing the "You can't escape Batman." I thought Nolan was going in the direction of "this is a good thing," but as we know from TDKR- he tinkered (I think this is the word Im looking for, it's meant to be positive not negative) with some audience expectations *time for the same comment Ive been using* which some liked, others didnt.

And it really does pain me to dislike TDKR, cause I love it when artists do something more than just chugging out the same stuff.

 

[milost]

I think I was talking in terms of Rachel motive. When I first saw TDK, the message I got from it was kinda a Batman... Forever (oh God) vibe. So when Rachel told Bruce in BB "this is your mask," the letter to me interpreted she was continuing the "You can't escape Batman." I thought Nolan was going in the direction of "this is a good thing," but as we know from TDKR- he tinkered (I think this is the word Im looking for, it's meant to be positive not negative) with some audience expectations *time for the same comment Ive been using* which some liked, others didnt.

It definitely seemed like at the end of The Dark Knight they were going to go with the "Batman Forever" route (if they were going to continue and had plans at the time). No doubt about it. There are hints of it before The Dark Knight too, like you mention in Begins. Rachel is convinced that the Batman persona is the main persona, his real face, "the one criminals now fear" and that kid she knew never came back. That's a pretty bold statement to write and include in the story. It also doesn't help that by the Dark Knight, his "chance for a normal life" is blown away by the Joker that thinks Batman is fun and believes "they're destined to do this forever". And yeah, there's also the note.

Before TDKR, Begins and Dark Knight were always pitched as an early Batman, a year one Batman. It was gratifying to see him learn, even in Dark Knight. Then when he finally stops the Joker, it felt like, "hey, this is the Batman from the comics". That experienced, "I'm going to do this forever", prep time, brooding Batman.

That whole line, "beautiful isn't it" is sort of chilling too. Especially when you figure it's after Rachel's death. Back in 2008, I always felt that in that sort of third act he was the fully fledged Batman. He's done learning the ropes, he's upgrading his armor to be more efficient, the Batcave and Wayne Manor is being rebuilt, etc. etc. He's also finally one step ahead of the Joker and is pushed at his limit when he kills Dent. Hell even the ending, "the Dark Knight", he's not a "hero", he's a dark hero who does what he has to. No more, "Rachel this" or "symbol that". I always assumed that her death resonated with Bruce the same way his parents did as a child so there was no turning back.


Then that whole "frozen in time" comment by Nolan before it became known what was really up. I thought he'd be "frozen in time" as Batman, not as a bearded "Bruce Wayne" who wants to be Batman who hasn't been in the suit since "that night", in horrible, horrible condition with a cane, who hasn't gone outside and hasn't been needed for years.


But then, yeah, we were thrown the curve ball, the rug was pulled out from under us. Nolan even said, "I think this will be a surprise to the audience". 8 years meant no Batman. 8 years meant no need for anything since "more important crimes" are at an end. 8 years meant recluse Bruce. 8 years meant Dent Acts and Harvey Dent days. 8 years meant "Batman could be anybody, that was the point". We got a rebuilt Batcave and Wayne Manor, but only for it to be used for Harvey Dent Day parties, archery and a few background checks before it's given to random new comer John Blake. We didn't even get a new upgraded suit when he eventually did become Batman even though the character would constantly be making upgrades. And when he's finally comes back, he's gone no sooner than he returned. Then when he returns again, he's gone for good.




I have no problem with any of the ideas in TDKR. Giving Bruce the option of having a happy life, Bruce Wayne being crippled or "broken" (man, I thought that cane was surely because of Bane), or even any ideas of retirement, but the way it was all executed just seems downright wrong to me. All of it actually. Yeah, surprises are nice, but some expectations are nice to have delivered. The transition, or lack there of between the world of The Dark Knight to the world of TDKR is a bit odd as well. Especially when it practically opens with a clip from TDK and then we're thrust into this new world, 8 years into the future where everything you assumed would logically happen, hasn't happened.


Yeah, this isn't "comic book Batman" and even though none of this is reality, a person can only handle so much physically. But a Batman that's only around for a year, year and a half tops? Especially after the cool, calculating character he became by the end of the Dark Knight? Even the new cool titled he's dubbed? To just reduce that to him acting strange, not really doing anything as Bruce Wayne or Batman just feels so wrong. Alright, so there's no mob crime for out there for Batman? If Bruce is really stuck in Batman mode and he's really compulsive and obsessed (like other characters in Nolan films), what would stop him from looking for crime? Surely there's some bad stuff in a city as big as Gotham, even without the mob. No muggings? No murders? No rapists? What if you had a Batman who was out looking for it, just to do it because he NEEDS to be out there? That's more compelling than moping around doing nothing isn't it? There's that episode from BTAS, I think it's "Christmas with the Joker" where it's Christmas Eve or something and Robin thinks that the night would be crime free and he's trying to convince Batman to hang it up until after it's over and enjoy the holidays. What does Batman do? He goes out there looking for it. He comes across a guy who he thinks is committing a crime and he's not, etc. etc. He's always out there looking for something. If there's no crime, than the Batman persona has no purpose.





I don't think we sound like "boo hoo, we didn't get our way or what we wanted to see", but it was sort of jarring to go in and get something totally different. Not just a few things, that's expected, but almost the entire picture. The whole "Robin" thing after years of "there won't be no bloooody Robin" was crazy to. It was like the movie was those fan fiction things we'd all see before 2011. "Bane and LoS", "Talia's Revenge", "Robin Cop" etc. I mean, after Batman Begins, it was pretty self explanatory where it would go. Nothing crazy or unpleasant. We knew we were going to get an active Batman. New suit. Cool. Yup, of course he's going to fight the Joker, they played it up at the end of Begins. Oh, the new District Attorney, Harvey Dent? Gordon, Dent and Batman are going to work with each other to take down the mob? Joker is rising to the top of the criminal food chain? Interrogation scenes with Batman pummeling the crap out of the Joker. Possible Two-Face!?!? All made sense.


Sure, taking the blame for the crimes and Two-Face dying were surprises, but it never felt wrong.

 

[Snow Queen]

The way I see it, the comments about him being Batman forever in the previous films took on a different meaning with Rises. Sure, you can take it as him wearing the cowl forever and so did I but after Rises I see them as comments on Bruce's psyche never going to be able to escape Batman and if he tries without bringing peace to himself, he's going to destroy himself (see the beginning of TDKR). But, he does this and later sees the error of his ways and escapes the Pit, conquering his own fractured psyche and coming to peace with himself by escaping from the well he fell into and never left (like the 'frozen in time' comment Milost brought up with the Pit being a symbol of the well).

 

[BatLobster]

I don't think Bruce "became" anything during the course of The Dark Knight. To me he was in his prime from beginning to end in that movie. He doesn't really have much of an arc in that movie, until the very end when he makes a huge sacrifice that nobody sees coming.

All I got from the end of TDK was that this man will do literally anything to give his city hope that he valued Dent as a symbol more than his own symbol. "You're the symbol of hope that I can never be". He realized that it was his actions that brought about The Joker's rise and unleashed hell upon Gotham.

In a sense, the end of TDK is him finally giving up on his symbol and putting it to a different use. But that shouldn't contradict the component of Bruce that wants Gotham to get better internally and flourish under a better, less corrupt system that doesn't need Batman.

Bottom line, TDKR could have went two directions, the "Batman forever" direction that sets up the series as an ongoing Bond-like franchise, or the full circle trilogy route that closes off the story. The plan was always there that IF they did a third film, it would be to end the story. I personally think that a lot of fans just had a misguided belief that Nolan was simply trying to tell the story of how Bruce became the Batman of the comics that fights crime forever.

It really doesn't matter at all to me how much time he clocked in as Batman. It's all relative as to what would be an appropriate timespan for his career. All I know is he encountered Zsasz, an Ubu-type character, Ra's, Scarecrow, Falcone, Maroni, Joker, Two-Face, Bane, Catwoman and Talia over the course of three films. It's not all inclusive, but it's a very nice spread considering this is a condensed version of the mythos.

The way I see it, the comments about him being Batman forever in the previous films took on a different meaning with Rises. Sure, you can take it as him wearing the cowl forever and so did I but after Rises I see them as comments on Bruce's psyche never going to be able to escape Batman and if he tries without bringing peace to himself, he's going to destroy himself (see the beginning of TDKR). But, he does this and later sees the error of his ways and escapes the Pit, conquering his own fractured psyche and coming to peace with himself by escaping from the well he fell into and never left (like the 'frozen in time' comment Milost brought up with the Pit being a symbol of the well).

Totally agree.

 

[jmc]

It goes both ways, you say people who dont like the film shouldnt take crap from people who lile it. Why should people who like it take crap from people who dont like?

The hell it goes both ways. I don't see anyone crapping on people who love the film.

 

[Clerk]

I guess this is kinda off & on topic, but has there been a legit "Nolanite" conversation here?

Just in terms of discussing the Nolan die-hard fans and die-hard haters. Ill go to another forum and see stuff like, "Nolan is the God of Batman, no other films should be made forever, just end Batman," and I'll see stuff like "The Dark Knight sucks, all Gordon did was cop stuff, Nolan is a hack."

I mean, I dont know what there is to discuss, but does anyone think that the Nolan fandom has brought on a lot of the divisiveness to TDKR for both camps? Like, people trying to justify its perfection and people trying to justify its failure.

 

[BatLobster]

There have been discussions on and off, but it's usually more accusatory and not from an objective perspective.

I think there's two kinds of divisiveness. The first kind is the one you're describing, but that was already gaining some momentum in the post-TDK years, and then when Avengers hit, it started to reach a fever pitch. I could just sense that TDKR was going to be divisive in the months before it came out. I know someone who said they had no problems at all with TDKR and thought it was a perfectly well-made movie with great parallels and symmetry with the first film, but just felt "over" the whole dark/serious approach after Avengers.

Then there's the second kind, and that's more from within the Nolan fanbase, with some fans feeling that it didn't hit the bar he's set for himself with this series. Which dispels the idea that just because someone's a Nolan fan they'll praise everything he does. There's also a lot of fans who love or like the film despite having some of the same criticisms and issues that haters do.

It's wildly divisive. Not quite as simple as a Nolanite/Nolan hater thing I don't think, though I'm sure that plays some role, because everything that's been lambasted about the film I would say are "Nolanisms" for the most part (compressing large amounts of story, exposition, a thinly developed female character etc.)

 

[JackWhite]

After watching TDKR for the fifth time today, Blake being a version of Robin still really bugs me. Not because of the whole namedrop at the end, but because he was just a version of Robin. All of the other characters Nolan used in his trilogy weren't versions of the characters of the comics, they were those characters.

Having Blake as a Robin-like character felt really off to me. It would have felt the same if Nolan called Bane just "the mercenary" for the entire film, and then at some point have Alfred mention "I guess he really is the Bane of your existence, master Wayne". I think the namedrop at the end would have worked even better had Blake been called officer Grayson from the get go. It just felt like Nolan didn't really want to use Robin, but perverted the character a tad to make him fit in his universe.

I mean, yeah the Joker didn't have perma-white skin, but it was still the Joker from head to toe, characterization, and in name. Same goes for all the other characters. Hell, even Talia was represented fairly well, but she was mostly underutilized.

I don't know, do you guys get what I'm saying here? lol.

 

[MaxPalombella]

It would never have taken the eye off of Bruce Wayne, and he would have been a sidekick necessarily, more of an heir apparent in training. Dont you think it was ridiculous for Blake to become Batman without any real training, other than as a police officer? The fourth film would have been about Batman's legacy, and ending with him deciding to be a philanthropist and a father. How does that not make sense?

 

[JackWhite]

It would never have taken the eye off of Bruce Wayne, and he would have been a sidekick necessarily, more of an heir apparent in training. Dont you think it was ridiculous for Blake to become Batman without any real training, other than as a police officer? The fourth film would have been about Batman's legacy, and ending with him deciding to be a philanthropist and a father. How does that not make sense?

I've gotta admit, there was too much going on in the film to really get into the idea that Blake would be a competent successor of Bruce.

Even though Blake is my least favorite main character from the trilogy, his scene with Bruce in Wayne Manor always makes me tear up. Another scene like that would have probably sold me on him being a worthy heir to the Batman throne.

 

[jmc]

I guess this is kinda off & on topic, but has there been a legit "Nolanite" conversation here?

Just in terms of discussing the Nolan die-hard fans and die-hard haters. Ill go to another forum and see stuff like, "Nolan is the God of Batman, no other films should be made forever, just end Batman," and I'll see stuff like ''The Dark Knight sucks, all Gordon did was cop stuff, Nolan is a hack.''

I mean, I dont know what there is to discuss, but does anyone think that the Nolan fandom has brought on a lot of the divisiveness to TDKR for both camps? Like, people trying to justify its perfection and people trying to justify its failure.

Is there any reason you can't do it here? Or are you talking about discussion of Nolan's entire catalog?

 

[BatLobster]

After watching TDKR for the fifth time today, Blake being a version of Robin still really bugs me. Not because of the whole namedrop at the end, but because he was just a version of Robin. All of the other characters Nolan used in his trilogy weren't versions of the characters of the comics, they were those characters.

Having Blake as a Robin-like character felt really off to me. It would have felt the same if Nolan called Bane just "the mercenary" for the entire film, and then at some point have Alfred mention "I guess he really is the Bane of your existence, master Wayne". I think the namedrop at the end would have worked even better had Blake been called officer Grayson from the get go. It just felt like Nolan didn't really want to use Robin, but perverted the character a tad to make him fit in his universe.

I mean, yeah the Joker didn't have perma-white skin, but it was still the Joker from head to toe, characterization, and in name. Same goes for all the other characters. Hell, even Talia was represented fairly well, but she was mostly underutilized.

I don't know, do you guys get what I'm saying here? lol.

I do see where you're coming from. I guess it doesn't really bug me that he's a version of Robin, mostly because it's become somewhat of a tradition for there to be lots of Robins. That mantle has become somewhat of a revolving door in the mythology. Frank Miller created his own Robin for TDKReturns and changed the gender. I guess I feel Nolan earned the right to do his own version of Robin after everything he had done for the character. His own little stamp on the Batman mythos.

I'd probably feel differently if Robin Blake was the version of Robin in a story where Batman had a sidekick from the beginning. But since this was a story that dealt with a solo Batman career, and this film dealt with the end of that I thought it was nice to see them pay homage to the idea of Robin.

You never know, John Blake may very well pop up in a Batman comic some day.

 

[Clerk]

Is there any reason you can't do it here? Or are you talking about discussion of Nolan's entire catalog?

Well, it could go either way- off topic by going into Nolan's catalog, on topic by discussing if fandom has lead to the TDKR bad blood that I've noticed in other parts of the interwebs.

 

[JackWhite]

It doesn't really bug me that he's a version of Robin, mostly because it's become somewhat of a tradition for their to be lots of Robins. Frank Miller created his own Robin for TDKReturns and changed the gender. I guess I feel Nolan earned the right to do his own version of Robin after everything he had done for the character. His own little stamp on the Batman mythos.

You never know, John Blake may very well pop up in a Batman comic some day.

God forbid....

Yeah, Blake and Talia were the two characters I didn't want in the film, but it's funny because after watching the film, I ended up wanting more Talia and like zero Blake, lol.

Still love the hell out of that first act though.

 

[Victarion]

God forbid....

Yeah, Blake and Talia were the two characters I didn't want in the film, but it's funny because after watching the film, I ended up wanting more Talia and like zero Blake, lol.

Still love the hell out of that first act though.

Talia's growing on me as well. It helps that Miranda's characterization in the first part of the film works for Talia, too. It wasn't just a ruse; Bruce was just slow on the uptake. I get you on Blake; I never cared much for Robin from the comics regardless, so it didn't bother me too much. Blake's training as a police does give him an advantage if he does become the Batman. He has a better knowledge of the legal system than Batman. Plus he could do as Alfred wanted Bruce to do, and lend Gordon his knowledge rather than his body. Until he's had time to train himself.

I think the divisiveness goes back as far as the official announcement we got early in 2011 about the villains. Bane wasn't the popular choice of villain. Again, the fanfic plots in these parts were Riddler ad nauseum.

 

[Snow Queen]

You know, it'd be interesting if Jonathan Nolan wrote a comic (illustrated by Jock since I love him) about Blake as Batman. Except, difference between Bruce Bats and him is that for his first few cases, he's the more detective Batman. But, during this time, he's also training in the cave or other places. I think it'd be fun.

 

[jmc]

Well, it could go either way- off topic by going into Nolan's catalog, on topic by discussing if fandom has lead to the TDKR bad blood that I've noticed in other parts of the interwebs.

There is no doubt after TDK there were people who were going to be out for blood regardless if Rises didn't live up to that film. Those people however have never been fans of this series or Nolan himself in the first place, they complain for the sake of complaining, ***** and moan about ridiculous details just to cause an argument and more or less just wanted to see Nolan fail. That is where supporters of the film are getting their wires crossed, they are lumping people who love films one and two, and in some cases Nolan's entire body of work in with the same crowd as people who were going to be dismissive of the film regardless if it was the greatest film in history or a turd of a movie. The great irony is that those supporters themselves now look like the rabid fanboys by calling anyone who has a less than favourable opinion as ungrateful and placing the blame on everyone for having too high an expectation on the movie or simply not understanding the subtleties of the film as if it's this complex narrative that requires multiple viewings to fully understand. The thing is a person who's a genuine fan of an artists work is able to tell when said artist doesn't do something as good as his/her previous work, because they know what said artist is capable of. One of the arguments is that Begins and TDK weren't perfect either - of course they're not and no-ones says as much, there are some very valid issues with films one and two, but the stories and emotional cores in those films outweigh the faults for many, for some Rises doesn't and they should be allowed to say so without being labeled as some kind of 'hater'.

 

[BatLobster]

There is no doubt after TDK there were people who were going to be out for blood regardless if Rises didn't live up to that film. Those people however have never been fans of this series or Nolan himself in the first place, they complain for the sake of complaining, ***** and moan about ridiculous details just to cause an argument and more or less just wanted to see Nolan fail. That is where supporters of the film are getting their wires crossed, they are lumping people who love films one and two, and in some cases Nolan's entire body of work in with the same crowd as people who were going to be dismissive of the film regardless if it was the greatest film in history or a turd of a movie. The great irony is that those supporters themselves now look like the rabid fanboys by calling anyone who has a less than favourable opinion as ungrateful and placing the blame on everyone for having too high an expectation on the movie or simply not understanding the subtleties of the film as if it's this complex narrative that requires multiple viewings to fully understand. The thing is a person who's a genuine fan of an artists work is able to tell when said artist doesn't do something as good as his/her previous work, because they know what said artist is capable of. One of the arguments is that Begins and TDK weren't perfect either - of course they're not and no-ones says as much, there are some very valid issues with films one and two, but the stories and emotional cores in those films outweigh the faults for many, for some Rises doesn't and they should be allowed to say so without being labeled as some kind of 'hater'.

I don't think that's necessarily true. I went out of my way in my post above to distinguish to the two camps, and as you know I love the film.

I don't think fans of the first two who didn't like Rises are "haters". I do detect a lot of bitterness on their end, and I get why. Nobody who adored the first two films went into Rises wanting to dislike it, so it's understandable to have that reaction. But frankly there's been a lot of mudslinging on both sides of the fence. In fact your signature comes across as a bit of an insult to anybody who likes or defends the film. Like the fans who like the film are inferior fans or something who are just making excuses. I don't mean to call you out on that jmc, and I hope you know I respect your opinion, but I think we should all ease on the generalizing. There are extremists on both side of the fence, but plenty of level heads in the middle where debates happen without any name calling. I try to make the effort to show that I can see where the other side is coming from (Nolan-Bat fans who were let down that is). As discouraging as it is to be labeled a "hater" by some people, I can assure you it's just as discouraging to feel lumped in with the "rabid fanboy" crowd.

At the end of the day, it's all about a feeling, and no matter how much we debate the film no one can invalidate another person's feelings on a movie.

 

[JackWhite]

Things were outrageous here, right after TDKR came out. I think the majority of people have either calmed down, left, or have come to terms with how they feel about the film.

I'm glad that most here, who don't like TDKR, didn't turn on the first two.

 

[BatLobster]

You know, it'd be interesting if Jonathan Nolan wrote a comic (illustrated by Jock since I love him) about Blake as Batman. Except, difference between Bruce Bats and him is that for his first few cases, he's the more detective Batman. But, during this time, he's also training in the cave or other places. I think it'd be fun.

I really would love something like that. I'm kinda bummed there aren't ancillary stories out there for a story as big as TDKR. Even Inception has a motion comic that serves as a little prequel to the film. You'd think WB would've capitalized on an opportunity there to expand the story in some way, be it animated film, comic or motion comic.

So much to cover- Bane and Talia's history, Bruce's retirement/Dent Act/clean energy project, or a story that takes place after TDKR featuring Blake/reconstruction of Gotham.

Oh well...

 

[titansupes]

I really would love something like that. I'm kinda bummed there aren't ancillary stories out there for a story as big as TDKR. Even Inception has a motion comic that serves as a little prequel to the film. You'd think WB would've capitalized on an opportunity there to expand the story in some way, be it animated film, comic or motion comic.

So much to cover- Bane and Talia's history, Bruce's retirement/Dent Act/clean energy project, or a story that takes place after TDKR featuring Blake/reconstruction of Gotham.

Oh well...

My dream has been 4 different mini-series or Earth One style OGN's of:

1. The lives of Talia/Ra's/Bane from the pit to breaking from the League and learning of Ra's death.
2. Post-BB, Pre-TDK featuring Batman and Gordon's blitz on the mob, trying to cut Crane off from his supplies, trying to figure out who the new head of the Falcone crime family as well as trying to put a stop or stem the war between the factions of the family for control (and eventually putting Maroni under arrest, as he is on trial at the beginning of TDK).
3. Selina's life, from childhood to accepting the job to get Wayne's finger prints for the Clean Slate.
4. Blake's first year as Batman.

5. MAYBE a Jim Gordon one between TDK and TDKR dealing with the Dent Act, destroying the mob, his feelings on Harvey, being without Batman, and his family leaving him.

 

[Snow Queen]

I'd like a series of five from Jonathan that covers:

Book 1: Selina Kyle's origin and some fleshing out of Jen
Book 2: Gordon, the Dent Act and the clean energy project
Book 3: Bruce going into retirement, focusing on his psyche rather than him physically (see Batman and Robin #17 for an example with Damian Wayne)
Book 4: Bane's origin, Talia travelling to find Ra's, training with Ra's and Bane making a name for himself
Book 5: Basically Blakeman: Year One

 

[Isearch4dope]

I do see where you're coming from. I guess it doesn't really bug me that he's a version of Robin, mostly because it's become somewhat of a tradition for there to be lots of Robins. That mantle has become somewhat of a revolving door in the mythology. Frank Miller created his own Robin for TDKReturns and changed the gender. I guess I feel Nolan earned the right to do his own version of Robin after everything he had done for the character. His own little stamp on the Batman mythos.

I'd probably feel differently if Robin Blake was the version of Robin in a story where Batman had a sidekick from the beginning. But since this was a story that dealt with a solo Batman career, and this film dealt with the end of that I thought it was nice to see them pay homage to the idea of Robin.

You never know, John Blake may very well pop up in a Batman comic some day.

By all means Nolan deserved that right (even if he stated before that he wouldn't tackle any thing of a robinly nature) but what he did with the character was lacking. If from the get go they knew they wanted to have some form of mantle passing and hints of a new soldier to carry the symbol, I believe the 8 year gap was perfect to allow John Blake to be a solid inclusion and the best kept secret of TDKR. Keep in mind all of this will not be shown but revealed as a surprise with subtle hints before the big reveal. I would have Blake figure out Bruce's secret probably 4-5 years after TDK. Because of the orphan similarities and the ability to see through Bruce's act, I would have had him secretly investigating Bruce since the end of TDK (Bruce is still a recluse as a poster said earlier he can't hang up the cowl mentally...he would track down murderers, rapists, thieves etc. as Bruce Wayne (no cowl) but use less theatrical means and gadgets due to heat from citizens and GCPD). He would confront Bruce with evidence (secretly placed tracking device on him to follow his movements) and force him to consider teaching him or risk his secret being exposed. Impressed by Blake's work, Bruce who is looking for new ways to combat crime in his obsessive state agrees to teach him under and agreement (Blake would assist him with his fight and serve as a kind of replacement for Gordon and he shall never wear a cowl...Bruce also sees himself in Blake and an identifiable passion). When we meet Blake we meet an individual struggling between being a cop playing strictly by the books and glimpses of someone willing to act outside the law as the movie progresses. He is already Bruce's trained ally assisting him from within GCPD working as a team but of course we don't get to know this until the end. As the movie progresses we get to see Blake slowly reveal shades of someone having been trained. After Bane takes control of Gotham Blake throws his badge away but we the audience don't know why as yet (this is where he starts his rise and stops showing fear but not too over the top for us to suspect). Blake will be the one getting the bomb on the truck and Gordon will be the one having the bridge stand-off during the climax. We won't know that Blake knows Bruce well until he swings into the cave (no package with GPS left for him) and we see Bruce standing there smiling (they won't say a word to each other). Blake then rises on the elevating platform....(cue title) Blake can also be the reason Bruce was able to get back into Gotham unnoticed.

 

[jmc]

I don't think that's necessarily true. I went out of my way in my post above to distinguish to the two camps, and as you know I love the film.

I don't think fans of the first two who didn't like Rises are "haters". I do detect a lot of bitterness on their end, and I get why. Nobody who adored the first two films went into Rises wanting to dislike it, so it's understandable to have that reaction. But frankly there's been a lot of mudslinging on both sides of the fence. In fact your signature comes across as a bit of an insult to anybody who likes or defends the film. Like the fans who like the film are inferior fans or something who are just making excuses. I don't mean to call you out on that jmc, and I hope you know I respect your opinion, but I think we should all ease on the generalizing. There are extremists on both side of the fence, but plenty of level heads in the middle where debates happen without any name calling. I try to make the effort to show that I can see where the other side is coming from (Nolan-Bat fans who were let down that is). As discouraging as it is to be labeled a ''hater'' by some people, I can assure you it's just as discouraging to feel lumped in with the ''rabid fanboy'' crowd.

At the end of the day, it's all about a feeling, and no matter how much we debate the film no one can invalidate another person's feelings on a movie.

Just a note on my signature, it's not meant specifically for Rises, it's just a general statement for all big name franchises that fail to deliver but are still defended by the types that don't want to hear anything negative about their beloved series. I get frustrated when people accept mediocrity and try to justify certain decisions because all they want is praise. I get it that people love certain characters, I'm a Batman guy through and through so I know, but some people let that love of a certain character cloud their opinion of an ordinary movie. I will acknowledge I should have worded what I wrote in that last paragraph better, it wasn't my intention to lump every supporter of the film into the same group as those who don't like any negativity, in fact I can appreciate good debate on the movie. I will admit there are issues with both sides misunderstanding one and other and where they stand on the movie, I think one thing we can all agree on is that Rises is not a bad movie, but for some it's not good movie either.

 

[Human Torch]

It definitely seemed like at the end of The Dark Knight they were going to go with the "Batman Forever" route (if they were going to continue and had plans at the time). No doubt about it. There are hints of it before The Dark Knight too, like you mention in Begins. Rachel is convinced that the Batman persona is the main persona, his real face, "the one criminals now fear" and that kid she knew never came back. That's a pretty bold statement to write and include in the story. It also doesn't help that by the Dark Knight, his "chance for a normal life" is blown away by the Joker that thinks Batman is fun and believes "they're destined to do this forever". And yeah, there's also the note.

Before TDKR, Begins and Dark Knight were always pitched as an early Batman, a year one Batman. It was gratifying to see him learn, even in Dark Knight. Then when he finally stops the Joker, it felt like, "hey, this is the Batman from the comics". That experienced, "I'm going to do this forever", prep time, brooding Batman.

That whole line, "beautiful isn't it" is sort of chilling too. Especially when you figure it's after Rachel's death. Back in 2008, I always felt that in that sort of third act he was the fully fledged Batman. He's done learning the ropes, he's upgrading his armor to be more efficient, the Batcave and Wayne Manor is being rebuilt, etc. etc. He's also finally one step ahead of the Joker and is pushed at his limit when he kills Dent. Hell even the ending, "the Dark Knight", he's not a "hero", he's a dark hero who does what he has to. No more, "Rachel this" or "symbol that". I always assumed that her death resonated with Bruce the same way his parents did as a child so there was no turning back.


Then that whole "frozen in time" comment by Nolan before it became known what was really up. I thought he'd be "frozen in time" as Batman, not as a bearded "Bruce Wayne" who wants to be Batman who hasn't been in the suit since "that night", in horrible, horrible condition with a cane, who hasn't gone outside and hasn't been needed for years.


But then, yeah, we were thrown the curve ball, the rug was pulled out from under us. Nolan even said, "I think this will be a surprise to the audience". 8 years meant no Batman. 8 years meant no need for anything since "more important crimes" are at an end. 8 years meant recluse Bruce. 8 years meant Dent Acts and Harvey Dent days. 8 years meant "Batman could be anybody, that was the point". We got a rebuilt Batcave and Wayne Manor, but only for it to be used for Harvey Dent Day parties, archery and a few background checks before it's given to random new comer John Blake. We didn't even get a new upgraded suit when he eventually did become Batman even though the character would constantly be making upgrades. And when he's finally comes back, he's gone no sooner than he returned. Then when he returns again, he's gone for good.




I have no problem with any of the ideas in TDKR. Giving Bruce the option of having a happy life, Bruce Wayne being crippled or "broken" (man, I thought that cane was surely because of Bane), or even any ideas of retirement, but the way it was all executed just seems downright wrong to me. All of it actually. Yeah, surprises are nice, but some expectations are nice to have delivered. The transition, or lack there of between the world of The Dark Knight to the world of TDKR is a bit odd as well. Especially when it practically opens with a clip from TDK and then we're thrust into this new world, 8 years into the future where everything you assumed would logically happen, hasn't happened.


Yeah, this isn't "comic book Batman" and even though none of this is reality, a person can only handle so much physically. But a Batman that's only around for a year, year and a half tops? Especially after the cool, calculating character he became by the end of the Dark Knight? Even the new cool titled he's dubbed? To just reduce that to him acting strange, not really doing anything as Bruce Wayne or Batman just feels so wrong. Alright, so there's no mob crime for out there for Batman? If Bruce is really stuck in Batman mode and he's really compulsive and obsessed (like other characters in Nolan films), what would stop him from looking for crime? Surely there's some bad stuff in a city as big as Gotham, even without the mob. No muggings? No murders? No rapists? What if you had a Batman who was out looking for it, just to do it because he NEEDS to be out there? That's more compelling than moping around doing nothing isn't it? There's that episode from BTAS, I think it's "Christmas with the Joker" where it's Christmas Eve or something and Robin thinks that the night would be crime free and he's trying to convince Batman to hang it up until after it's over and enjoy the holidays. What does Batman do? He goes out there looking for it. He comes across a guy who he thinks is committing a crime and he's not, etc. etc. He's always out there looking for something. If there's no crime, than the Batman persona has no purpose.





I don't think we sound like "boo hoo, we didn't get our way or what we wanted to see", but it was sort of jarring to go in and get something totally different. Not just a few things, that's expected, but almost the entire picture. The whole "Robin" thing after years of "there won't be no bloooody Robin" was crazy to. It was like the movie was those fan fiction things we'd all see before 2011. "Bane and LoS", "Talia's Revenge", "Robin Cop" etc. I mean, after Batman Begins, it was pretty self explanatory where it would go. Nothing crazy or unpleasant. We knew we were going to get an active Batman. New suit. Cool. Yup, of course he's going to fight the Joker, they played it up at the end of Begins. Oh, the new District Attorney, Harvey Dent? Gordon, Dent and Batman are going to work with each other to take down the mob? Joker is rising to the top of the criminal food chain? Interrogation scenes with Batman pummeling the crap out of the Joker. Possible Two-Face!?!? All made sense.


Sure, taking the blame for the crimes and Two-Face dying were surprises, but it never felt wrong.

Excellent post.I agree with every word.