OutOfBoose
#ReleaseTheAyerCut
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2012
- Messages
- 18,162
- Reaction score
- 3,978
- Points
- 103
Really interesting interview.
'm re-reading the Jim Starlin and Bernie Wrighston classic The Cult and I have noticed a lot of simularities between TDKR.
It all starts from the sewers by an analog Ras al Ghul, Deacon Blackfire.
Gotham's politicians are assassinated.
Gotham is undersiege and completely cutt off from the mainland by blocking it's bridges. Some of the bridges are blocked Just like in TDKR.
The complete nationale guard enters the sewers and gets killed.
Gordon gets injured and visited by Batman in the hospital. They have a simulair
conversation as in the movie.
Batman gets beaten and comes back to Gotham to save it.
Cops are getting hanged in the city.
The Deacon takes GCPD's complete arsenal(in the movie it's Batman's and the GCPD's arsenal)
There a page spread of Gotham almost the same as in Begins!
There's just too many...
To one or three comics maybe.
And they defiated a lot from The Cult, Knighfall by Bruce giving up his cowl.
For me, The Dark Knight Rises (2012) is specifically and definitely the end of the Batman story as I wanted to tell it, and the open-ended nature of the film is simply a very important thematic idea that we wanted to get into the movie, which is that Batman is a symbol. He can be anybody, and that was very important to us. Not every Batman fan will necessarily agree with that interpretation of the philosophy of the character, but for me it all comes back to the scene between Bruce Wayne and Alfred in the private jet in Batman Begins (2005), where the only way that I could find to make a credible characterization of a guy transforming himself into Batman is if it was as a necessary symbol, and he saw himself as a catalyst for change and therefore it was a temporary process, maybe a five-year plan that would be enforced for symbolically encouraging the good of Gotham to take back their city. To me, for that mission to succeed, it has to end, so this is the ending for me, and as I say, the open-ended elements are all to do with the thematic idea that Batman was not important as a man, he's more than that. He's a symbol, and the symbol lives on.
'm re-reading the Jim Starlin and Bernie Wrighston classic The Cult and I have noticed a lot of simularities between TDKR.
It all starts from the sewers by an analog Ras al Ghul, Deacon Blackfire.
Gotham's politicians are assassinated.
Gotham is undersiege and completely cutt off from the mainland by blocking it's bridges. Some of the bridges are blocked Just like in TDKR.
The complete nationale guard enters the sewers and gets killed.
Gordon gets injured and visited by Batman in the hospital. They have a simulair
conversation as in the movie.
Batman gets beaten and comes back to Gotham to save it.
Cops are getting hanged in the city.
The Deacon takes GCPD's complete arsenal(in the movie it's Batman's and the GCPD's arsenal)
There a page spread of Gotham almost the same as in Begins!
There's just too many...
O man that's unbelieveble. To me a straight up testimony that Nolan does not get 'Batman'. Batman is not just a symbol that any man can bear. He can't be anybody. Bruce trained it, honed it to almost perfection and eventually will pass it on to a handfull of other exeptional men (either Dick, Jean Paul, Terry, Damian).
O man that's unbelieveble. To me a straight up testimony that Nolan does not get 'Batman'. Batman is not just a symbol that any man can bear. He can't be anybody. Bruce trained it, honed it to almost perfection and eventually will pass it on to a handfull of other exeptional men (either Dick, Jean Paul, Terry, Damian).
Nolan needed another credible characterization, to substitute one that was already established well. To use a general fear of the unknown beast in the dark, that's why Bruce became the Batman. And to top that all he first had to overcome that fear. Weird thing is, that Nolan set that up much better than his little private jet converstation about a symbol.
Nolan just pulled a few things from here and there, just like The Joker is doing to make his point. You can't do that and say "He got it".
Nolan contradicts Begins (that was al about overcoming fear and becoming Batman) in this interview and in the following movies, by saying: guy transforming himself into Batman, for a 5 year project. He literally spells it out (like he does in the trilogy all to often) in TDK that Bruce is a normal guy, never at his peak, that hung up after a few setbacks.
He stopped because he was tired and broken after 4/5 years of being Batman, because it was a little naive rich kid side project he had going on. He just got lucky with Gordon's Taskforce and Gordon gives that win to him in his little speech.
You can't save a city from 100 years of corruption in a few years. You can't become Batman for a period of 5 year.
The 'original' Bruce Wayne would never stop, he doesn't enjoy what he's doing (I never said that, did I) and he also want's to end it badly. But he knows his task is never done.
Do tell. What am I missing from my "pulling things here and there" post?
Where in TDK does he spell out Bruce is a normal guy, not at his peak, and he hung up after a few setbacks? Quote the dialogue he spelled this out in please.
No offense, but you are talking total nonsense. For starters, since you are so observant in how Nolan spells things out, how did it fly under your radar that it was spelled out in TDKR that Bruce gave up the cowl not because he was tired and broken from years of being Batman, but because he was not needed as Batman anymore because organized crime was wiped out.
Gordon saying that shows that things weren't done, just that Batman left sudden.Gordon: "We were in this together. Then you were gone"
Batman: "The Batman wasn't needed anymore. We won"
Blake: "When you and Dent cleaned up the streets you cleaned them good. Soon we'll be chasing overdue library books".
Dent's legacy with the Dent Act cleaned up Gotham to minimum crime levels. In fact crime levels dropped so low that they even say Gordon is going to get early retirement from the Mayor. How much more clear did this need to be spelled out?
Is just lazy reasoning.Of course you can. Who are you to set realism boundaries? In a fantasy world where we are asked to believe one man can put on a cape and cowl, and be a one man army against an entire city full of organized crime, ancient worldwide ninja organizations etc, being Batman for a finite period, and wiping out organized crime in one city is tame by comparison.
But putting all that aside, look at the comics themselves e.g. The Dark Knight Returns. One of the most iconic and popular Batman tales. Yet its a version where Bruce quit being Batman for 10 long years. Even worse he did it when the city was still ravaged with crime and badly needed a Batman. Unlike Bale, who did it because Batman wasn't needed. Yet such a selfish quitting Batman is hailed as one of the best Batman tales ever.
To quote your own post:
Dent on Batman in TDK; "Gotham City is proud of an ordinary citizen standing up for what's right"
The public thinks it's a regular citizen taking a stand.
Then in TDKR he shows us that Bruce is just a normal reclusive guy, with knee problems. It heavily implies that Bruce gave up because of all the hurt.
Again, the knee thing and the whole reclusive thing.
Gordon saying that shows that things weren't done, just that Batman left sudden.
I've seen the movie, but it's not believable. So they take out a few crime-bosses and corruption, and all of a sudden 'poof' all crime is gone? Like I said Batman does more than fight organized crime and corruption.
Is just lazy reasoning.
I'm very found of TDK Returns, but like I said you can't pick an choose.
Batman is more than just DKR.
Just like Nolan tried to find a valid reason for Batman to quit, Miller tried but failed just as Nolan did.
That's my biggest issue with Nolan's trilogy. He went back into hiding twice and let murder happen in Gotham.
Atleast Miller made sure Bat's came back for good.
For some weird reason Nolan pulled an open ending out off his ..., by Bruce passing the torch to Blake. Put what for? Like you said there was no crime anymore? But he didn't leave a tumbler for Blake to collect overdue library books?
But you know what, it doesn't matter. You like the trilogy. I'm happy for you. I don't, I have to treat it like an 'Elseworld' story. It doesn't fit in anywhere else with my view of Batman.