Some of my issues with the Nolan Batman films

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.

JAWS

Super Freak
CF Supporter
Joined
Jul 23, 2006
Messages
17,369
Reaction score
2,697
Location
Atlantic Ocean
With some of the Back and forth going on in the Spoilers TDKR thread. It got me to thinking about the series and some problems I had with it.

First let me start off with the fact that I love the series and think it’s one of the best trilogy’s out there. I know this is Nolan’s Batman Universe but that does not mean it is not without some small problems.

These are just some issues I have always had and thought I would share and see if anyone else has the same issues.

1. Perhaps my biggest complaint is the Batman time line. From BB to TDK, how much time has passed?? A year?? Maybe a year and a half, tops? He then goes into hiding for eight years. Comes out of retirement and then is Batman again for a total of two or three days. Meaning he was Batman for One year six months and 3 days. Not long enough IMO to become the legend.

2. He allows Ra's al Ghul to die. IMO it’s the same as killing him and Batman does not kill. If Batman had no choice, then yes, it’s fine that he dies. But Bats says he won’t kill him but that does not mean he has to save him. If you, as a hero, can save someone and don’t act, knowing that the lack of action will allow him to die then what is the difference. Yes there is one. But IMO not for the Batman. I mean why not just let the Joker fall in the second film. He did not have to save him and apparently could walk away with a clear mind. I have no problem with Ra’s dieing. I just don’t think Batman would allow it if he could stop it.

3. He changes Rachel’s. I’m Sorry but Katie was fine in the first film and much much easier on the eyes. Maggie Gyllenhaal Giant Jowls were distracting through many of her scenes.

4. Two Face Dies. Look I know the whole “batman takes the fall” would have not been the same. But Two Face is a major villain. And again Batman just seems to let him die. If he can save Rachel from falling 30 stories up I think he could have saved Dent from one story. Just puts limits on the Batman’s ability and calls in to question his belief system. I know they could have come up with another idea to let Bat’s take the fall and allow Harvey to be put away behind lock and key with nobody believing the rants of a madman. They could have said Batman tried to kill Dent or something. Oh well.

5. Bane gets killed in an un eventful way. What the hell. I wanted/needed to see batman just kick this guys butt and rip that mask off and allow the police to restrain him. Why do villains in the films have to die but in the comics they can be allowed to live? Also he gets blasted by Catwoman and that’s it?? Just sort of a let down for a powerful villain.

6. No mention of the Joker. This is talked about at length in the other thread. Here are my thoughts that I posted in that thread.

Joker should not have been ignored. He should have been mentioned or recast. The Joker was here long before Heath and will be here long after. The character is bigger then any one actor. I am not saying base the whole film on him or give him a huge role but make some sort of acknowledgement.

I don't mind that he had no major role. As the Batman files book I have states (not a direct quote) "There is no reason to Joker's madness. One day he may let you live because he likes your shoes. The next day he might kill you because he likes your shoes"

In my mind Joker could have escaped but felt no need to act since Bane told the truth of Dent and the city was in chaos. Joker is a loner/sometimes leader and never a follower. But there needed to be some sort of mention. SOMETHING!! Because, yes it sort of wipes a big part of TDK away. Like most of it never happened. Even if they gave us a flashback of him in the cell when Rachel died.


8. Much to long of a wait between Batman being in the pit and finally getting to Gothem. Would have been different if Bane was doing some awesome evil stuff to help the time go by but instead it was rather boring and there was never a feeling of fear for the city. It is the main reason I think the film will suffer with repeated viewing.

9. Batman is gone. Who is going to train Robin???? Small complaint here as I can use my imagination to tell a story of Bats making an appearance here and there to help the new Robin/Nightwing/Batman/whatever.

Anyways those are my issues. With the exception of the lack of mention of Joker in TDKR which just makes him seem insignificant, these issues don’t really hurt the films. But they always bug me a bit.

What say you Batfriends.
 
seinfeld_had_enough.gif
 
With some of the Back and forth going on in the Spoilers TDKR thread. It got me to thinking about the series and some problems I had with it.

First let me start off with the fact that I love the series and think it’s one of the best trilogy’s out there. I know this is Nolan’s Batman Universe but that does not mean it is not without some small problems.

These are just some issues I have always had and thought I would share and see if anyone else has the same issues.

1. Perhaps my biggest complaint is the Batman time line. From BB to TDK, how much time has passed?? A year?? Maybe a year and a half, tops? He then goes into hiding for eight years. Comes out of retirement and then is Batman again for a total of two or three days. Meaning he was Batman for One year six months and 3 days. Not long enough IMO to become the legend.

2. He allows Ra's al Ghul to die. IMO it’s the same as killing him and Batman does not kill. If Batman had no choice, then yes, it’s fine that he dies. But Bats says he won’t kill him but that does not mean he has to save him. If you, as a hero, can save someone and don’t act, knowing that the lack of action will allow him to die then what is the difference. Yes there is one. But IMO not for the Batman. I mean why not just let the Joker fall in the second film. He did not have to save him and apparently could walk away with a clear mind. I have no problem with Ra’s dieing. I just don’t think Batman would allow it if he could stop it.

3. He changes Rachel’s. I’m Sorry but Katie was fine in the first film and much much easier on the eyes. Maggie Gyllenhaal Giant Jowls were distracting through many of her scenes.

4. Two Face Dies. Look I know the whole “batman takes the fall” would have not been the same. But Two Face is a major villain. And again Batman just seems to let him die. If he can save Rachel from falling 30 stories up I think he could have saved Dent from one story. Just puts limits on the Batman’s ability and calls in to question his belief system. I know they could have come up with another idea to let Bat’s take the fall and allow Harvey to be put away behind lock and key with nobody believing the rants of a madman. They could have said Batman tried to kill Dent or something. Oh well.

5. Bane gets killed in an un eventful way. What the hell. I wanted/needed to see batman just kick this guys butt and rip that mask off and allow the police to restrain him. Why do villains in the films have to die but in the comics they can be allowed to live? Also he gets blasted by Catwoman and that’s it?? Just sort of a let down for a powerful villain.

6. No mention of the Joker. This is talked about at length in the other thread. Here are my thoughts that I posted in that thread.

Joker should not have been ignored. He should have been mentioned or recast. The Joker was here long before Heath and will be here long after. The character is bigger then any one actor. I am not saying base the whole film on him or give him a huge role but make some sort of acknowledgement.

I don't mind that he had no major role. As the Batman files book I have states (not a direct quote) "There is no reason to Joker's madness. One day he may let you live because he likes your shoes. The next day he might kill you because he likes your shoes"

In my mind Joker could have escaped but felt no need to act since Bane told the truth of Dent and the city was in chaos. Joker is a loner/sometimes leader and never a follower. But there needed to be some sort of mention. SOMETHING!! Because, yes it sort of wipes a big part of TDK away. Like most of it never happened. Even if they gave us a flashback of him in the cell when Rachel died.


8. Much to long of a wait between Batman being in the pit and finally getting to Gothem. Would have been different if Bane was doing some awesome evil stuff to help the time go by but instead it was rather boring and there was never a feeling of fear for the city. It is the main reason I think the film will suffer with repeated viewing.

9. Batman is gone. Who is going to train Robin???? Small complaint here as I can use my imagination to tell a story of Bats making an appearance here and there to help the new Robin/Nightwing/Batman/whatever.

Anyways those are my issues. With the exception of the lack of mention of Joker in TDKR which just makes him seem insignificant, these issues don’t really hurt the films. But they always bug me a bit.

What say you Batfriends.




Post of the year !!!!!


:clap:fireworks:fireworks:fireworks


10/10
 
Lets not forget that Detective Ramirez was allowed to live. She must know what Two Face was up to. What happened to her. Somewhat big plot hole that I was suprised was not mentioned somehow in TDKR
 

Really?? That's it. As a Batfan you have none of the same issues.

I have heard of this Nolan fanboy syndrome but thought it was just a a tall tale. ;)

Not trying to bust on the films. I love them. TDK is just one of two modern films to bust into my top 10 movies of all time. I just have some issues that stick in my craw.
 
The issue most will take with this is that you could literally do this with every film ever made.

Not JAWS :lecture:lecture:lecture

;);)


But I am not picking at plot holes really. Just things that should have been avoided so to stay more true to a character that has been around for 70+ years.

It's not like I am saying the acting was bad or the direction sucked or that the stories were poor.

Most of my issues are charcter driven and IMO should not have happened.
 
I think the points you raised are simply not important to the overall story arc that Nolan created.

It was never his purpose to create a cinematic analog of the Batman comic universe.
 
Really?? That's it. As a Batfan you have none of the same issues.

I have heard of this Nolan fanboy syndrome but thought it was just a a tall tale. ;)

Not trying to bust on the films. I love them. TDK is just one of two modern films to bust into my top 10 movies of all time. I just have some issues that stick in my craw.

No I have a ton of issues, just forsee this thread turning into another Marvel VS DC civil war. :lol
 
With some of the Back and forth going on in the Spoilers TDKR thread. It got me to thinking about the series and some problems I had with it.

First let me start off with the fact that I love the series and think it’s one of the best trilogy’s out there. I know this is Nolan’s Batman Universe but that does not mean it is not without some small problems.

These are just some issues I have always had and thought I would share and see if anyone else has the same issues.

1. Perhaps my biggest complaint is the Batman time line. From BB to TDK, how much time has passed?? A year?? Maybe a year and a half, tops? He then goes into hiding for eight years. Comes out of retirement and then is Batman again for a total of two or three days. Meaning he was Batman for One year six months and 3 days. Not long enough IMO to become the legend.

2. He allows Ra's al Ghul to die. IMO it’s the same as killing him and Batman does not kill. If Batman had no choice, then yes, it’s fine that he dies. But Bats says he won’t kill him but that does not mean he has to save him. If you, as a hero, can save someone and don’t act, knowing that the lack of action will allow him to die then what is the difference. Yes there is one. But IMO not for the Batman. I mean why not just let the Joker fall in the second film. He did not have to save him and apparently could walk away with a clear mind. I have no problem with Ra’s dieing. I just don’t think Batman would allow it if he could stop it.

3. He changes Rachel’s. I’m Sorry but Katie was fine in the first film and much much easier on the eyes. Maggie Gyllenhaal Giant Jowls were distracting through many of her scenes.

4. Two Face Dies. Look I know the whole “batman takes the fall” would have not been the same. But Two Face is a major villain. And again Batman just seems to let him die. If he can save Rachel from falling 30 stories up I think he could have saved Dent from one story. Just puts limits on the Batman’s ability and calls in to question his belief system. I know they could have come up with another idea to let Bat’s take the fall and allow Harvey to be put away behind lock and key with nobody believing the rants of a madman. They could have said Batman tried to kill Dent or something. Oh well.

5. Bane gets killed in an un eventful way. What the hell. I wanted/needed to see batman just kick this guys butt and rip that mask off and allow the police to restrain him. Why do villains in the films have to die but in the comics they can be allowed to live? Also he gets blasted by Catwoman and that’s it?? Just sort of a let down for a powerful villain.

6. No mention of the Joker. This is talked about at length in the other thread. Here are my thoughts that I posted in that thread.

Joker should not have been ignored. He should have been mentioned or recast. The Joker was here long before Heath and will be here long after. The character is bigger then any one actor. I am not saying base the whole film on him or give him a huge role but make some sort of acknowledgement.

I don't mind that he had no major role. As the Batman files book I have states (not a direct quote) "There is no reason to Joker's madness. One day he may let you live because he likes your shoes. The next day he might kill you because he likes your shoes"

In my mind Joker could have escaped but felt no need to act since Bane told the truth of Dent and the city was in chaos. Joker is a loner/sometimes leader and never a follower. But there needed to be some sort of mention. SOMETHING!! Because, yes it sort of wipes a big part of TDK away. Like most of it never happened. Even if they gave us a flashback of him in the cell when Rachel died.


8. Much to long of a wait between Batman being in the pit and finally getting to Gothem. Would have been different if Bane was doing some awesome evil stuff to help the time go by but instead it was rather boring and there was never a feeling of fear for the city. It is the main reason I think the film will suffer with repeated viewing.

9. Batman is gone. Who is going to train Robin???? Small complaint here as I can use my imagination to tell a story of Bats making an appearance here and there to help the new Robin/Nightwing/Batman/whatever.

Anyways those are my issues. With the exception of the lack of mention of Joker in TDKR which just makes him seem insignificant, these issues don’t really hurt the films. But they always bug me a bit.

What say you Batfriends.

I was pretty bummed with how batman would just willingly give up the cowl just to have a nice life. But now the more I think of it as Nolan's own interpretation of the batman universe and try and put the comic lore aside I'm beginning to feel ok about it.
I'm 100% with you on points 1,3,5 and 9 though :goodpost:
 
The only thing that bugged me was how Joker was said to be a dog chasing cars and not having any plans, yet everything he did was part of a plan. He was a schemer, he planned to be caught, he planned to steel the mobs money, planned to turn Harvey Dent bad, had the hostages dressed up as clowns and thugs as doctors (planned), to name a few examples, my point is he done a lot of planning for someone he was trying to show everyone how useless their scheming and planning was....


But i enjoyed all the films so dont really care about the faults.
 
Last edited:
3. He changes Rachel’s. I’m Sorry but Katie was fine in the first film and much much easier on the eyes. Maggie Gyllenhaal Giant Jowls were distracting through many of her scenes.

I'm with you on this!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top