The Dark Knight Rises ***USE SPOILER TAGS***

[intothevoid]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

I wanted to cheer when Rachel died in TDK. Worthless character, portrayed by 2 annoying actresses... one of which is uglier than my dog.

And you accuse the rest of us of hyperbole

I didn't think the actresses did a good job of portraying the character, but I think the character was far from worthless, she's Bruce's connection to normality

 

[Solidus]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

They should do a Batman Marathon but Including
Batman
Batman Returns
Batman Forever
Batman and Robin
Batman Begins
The Dark Knight

and finally ending in Rises

Scratch Forever, Batman and Robin, and all of the Burton movies, and I'll watch that marathon.

 

[EVILFACE]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8evyE9TuYk

Looking again, the new DC logo peopled whined about looks pretty good.

 

[intothevoid]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

Looking again, the new DC logo peopled whined about looks pretty good.

I still think it looks incredibly lame

 

[IrishJedi]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

And you accuse the rest of us of hyperbole

The "uglier than my dog" quip was the only hyperbole used, but barely.

Either of those films could have been made to function without that character.

 

[DarkMagic]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

The "uglier than my dog" quip was the only hyperbole used, but barely.

Either of those films could have been made to function without that character.

There is nothing "barely" about hyperbole...by definition it is obvious exaggeration.

The Rachel/love interest character was pull to the alternative "normal" life that Bruce desperately wanted but couldn't have. How would you represent that life without the character?

 

[IrishJedi]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

There is nothing "barely" about hyperbole...by definition it is obvious exaggeration.

Duh. It was a joke.

The Rachel/love interest character was pull to the alternative "normal" life that Bruce desperately wanted but couldn't have. How would you represent that life without the character?

You need to have a love interest for a haunted and tortured character to desire a normal life?

 

[Devil_666]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

Gotta say, I'm happy they fixed Bane's voice so I can finally understand and make out what that midget is saying. Because in that short plane hijack scene that was released awhile back I couldn't understand a single thing that mofo said.

 

[intothevoid]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

You need to have a love interest for a haunted and tortured character to desire a normal life?

No, but you need to have SOMETHING or SOMEONE represent that 'normal life'.

If it wasn't Rachel, it'd have to be someone else. You can't take her out of the films and have them work, you need to replace her with something else.

I can't think of anything better than a love interest, it's something that is easy to relate to for the audience.

 

[IrishJedi]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

No, but you need to have SOMETHING or SOMEONE represent that 'normal life'.

If it wasn't Rachel, it'd have to be someone else. You can't take her out of the films and have them work, you need to replace her with something else.

I can't think of anything better than a love interest, it's something that is easy to relate to for the audience.

Wayne has friendships with other characters that provide that balance. Alfred, Gordon, Fox, and so on. Rachel was absolutely not necessary. They simply wanted to shoehorn yet another love interest into a Batman film.

IMHO, the only love interests that ever work for a Batman story are ones like Catwoman and Talia... because those characters actually serve other purposes beyond being just contrived love interests for Batman/Bruce Wayne.

 

[EVILFACE]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

Love interests are in every movie. Superman, Spider-Man, Thor, Captain America, Green Lantern. Got to get the ladies to go.

 

[intothevoid]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

Wayne has friendships with other characters that provide that balance. Alfred, Gordon, Fox, and so on. Rachel was absolutely not necessary. They simply wanted to shoehorn yet another love interest into a Batman film.

IMHO, the only love interests that ever work for a Batman story are ones like Catwoman and Talia... because those characters actually serve other purposes beyond being just contrived love interests for Batman/Bruce Wayne.

If you think Alfred, Gordon or Fox would be able to provide that yearning for a 'normal' life, then you completely misunderstand the purpose of each of those characters

Alfred is the father figure, to keep Wayne grounded yes, but nothing about Alfred would lead Wayne to want to give up the cape and cowl.

Fox is the tech expert, Wayne Enterprises CEO and 'Oracle' of sorts - extremely key to Batman's effectiveness by not only giving him the toys, but also taking care of his company so Wayne doesn't have to worry or spend much time on it.

Gordon is the only cop he can trust - again, key to Batman's crusade, and a beacon of hope that one day, Gotham can be rid of its ills


Selina Kyle as a love interest wouldn't make Bruce yearn a normal life. Their relationship is too complex and too dependent on their alter-ego's as well.

Talia, maybe, and that may be part of the plot of this film, until the truth comes out.

 

[The Mike]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

The thing about Bruce Wayne, the thing that has always been true for Bruce Wayne is that he doesn't yearn for a normal life. What he yearns for is to be able to lose the Wayne persona and dedicate his life fully to his addiction, to his mission and his life's calling of being Batman.

The Wayne aspect of his life was always a boring one, something paper. What Nolan did and with some respects the Batman directors before him was shoehorn the love interest to make Wayne more interesting by stealing a page from the book of Kent.

Clark is the one who dies to be with Lois and would give up everything to be with her but she loves Superman and he fears sharing this aspect of his life for her safety. It's the "good guy" complex that really didn't exist for Bruce before the modern age. Even when they were looking for weapons against him villains would choose Lois Lane or Iris West or even Carol Ferris but with Batman they'd go after a Robin or Alfred.

There is a reason for it, it hits to what he cares about, his mission.

Through Rachel, Nolan was able to give Wayne a dynamic quality, another layer of torture that the directors before him tried to do, unsuccessfully, but it wasn't part of the mythos and even in the books, Bruce finds women like Talia and Catwoman more attractive and more his speed because they share his duality, the problem is that he is more attracted to the villainous ones than the ones on his side. Even in the books he is more annoyed with characters like Vicky Vale with anything other than a hook up than actually bringing them into the cave and saying "here is my world"

What's weird is that through both Selina and Talia is that in using them they'll tap that aspect of the dualities and how they fit in the life of Batman with a Rachel to compare it to.

What people have to accept is that there is two "verses" running here:

1: The Nolanverse where Bruce needs to not be Batman and be normal, even though that goes against what has been established for decades but IS his mindset.

2: The DCU where Bruce's mission is first and foremost and causes him to forgo personal attachments to the points where people in his life like Alfred, his Robins, Batgirls, etc are the ones fighting for him and his approvals, his "love" and he treats it like a bother.

Sometimes they co-exist and sometimes they don't and when they don't you just have to shrug your shoulders and say "That's the way it is in the movies" whether it makes perfect sense or not.

 

[intothevoid]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

The thing about Bruce Wayne, the thing that has always been true for Bruce Wayne is that he doesn't yearn for a normal life. What he yearns for is to be able to lose the Wayne persona and dedicate his life fully to his addiction, to his mission and his life's calling of being Batman.

The Wayne aspect of his life was always a boring one, something paper. What Nolan did and with some respects the Batman directors before him was shoehorn the love interest to make Wayne more interesting by stealing a page from the book of Kent.

Clark is the one who dies to be with Lois and would give up everything to be with her but she loves Superman and he fears sharing this aspect of his life for her safety. It's the "good guy" complex that really didn't exist for Bruce before the modern age. Even when they were looking for weapons against him villains would choose Lois Lane or Iris West or even Carol Ferris but with Batman they'd go after a Robin or Alfred.

There is a reason for it, it hits to what he cares about, his mission.

Through Rachel, Nolan was able to give Wayne a dynamic quality, another layer of torture that the directors before him tried to do, unsuccessfully, but it wasn't part of the mythos and even in the books, Bruce finds women like Talia and Catwoman more attractive and more his speed because they share his duality, the problem is that he is more attracted to the villainous ones than the ones on his side. Even in the books he is more annoyed with characters like Vicky Vale with anything other than a hook up than actually bringing them into the cave and saying "here is my world"

What's weird is that through both Selina and Talia is that in using them they'll tap that aspect of the dualities and how they fit in the life of Batman with a Rachel to compare it to.

I agree completely

We know Rises opens with this 8 yr gap, Wayne has been in a sort of mourning period for much of the past 8 years leading up to TDKR. Now a threat arrives and he has to rediscover the Batman persona etc.

I think if the movie ends with Batman surviving, and remaining Batman, Wayne would have 'let go' completely of that yearning for a normal life and his transformation would be complete if you will. If this happens, then the entire Nolan trilogy could be seen as an origin tale, not just Begins.

If he ends up dying though, obviously that will not happen.

And if he ends up critically injured and retires, then it will be interesting to see how that's handled.

 

[RyanSD]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

The thing about Bruce Wayne, the thing that has always been true for Bruce Wayne is that he doesn't yearn for a normal life. What he yearns for is to be able to lose the Wayne persona and dedicate his life fully to his addiction, to his mission and his life's calling of being Batman.

The Wayne aspect of his life was always a boring one, something paper. What Nolan did and with some respects the Batman directors before him was shoehorn the love interest to make Wayne more interesting by stealing a page from the book of Kent.

Clark is the one who dies to be with Lois and would give up everything to be with her but she loves Superman and he fears sharing this aspect of his life for her safety. It's the "good guy" complex that really didn't exist for Bruce before the modern age. Even when they were looking for weapons against him villains would choose Lois Lane or Iris West or even Carol Ferris but with Batman they'd go after a Robin or Alfred.

There is a reason for it, it hits to what he cares about, his mission.

Through Rachel, Nolan was able to give Wayne a dynamic quality, another layer of torture that the directors before him tried to do, unsuccessfully, but it wasn't part of the mythos and even in the books, Bruce finds women like Talia and Catwoman more attractive and more his speed because they share his duality, the problem is that he is more attracted to the villainous ones than the ones on his side. Even in the books he is more annoyed with characters like Vicky Vale with anything other than a hook up than actually bringing them into the cave and saying "here is my world"

What's weird is that through both Selina and Talia is that in using them they'll tap that aspect of the dualities and how they fit in the life of Batman with a Rachel to compare it to.

What people have to accept is that there is two "verses" running here:

1: The Nolanverse where Bruce needs to not be Batman and be normal, even though that goes against what has been established for decades but IS his mindset.

2: The DCU where Bruce's mission is first and foremost and causes him to forgo personal attachments to the points where people in his life like Alfred, his Robins, Batgirls, etc are the ones fighting for him and his approvals, his "love" and he treats it like a bother.

Sometimes they co-exist and sometimes they don't and when they don't you just have to shrug your shoulders and say "That's the way it is in the movies" whether it makes perfect sense or not.

Ding Ding Ding! We have a winnah!

If there's one thing that Nolan completely missed in his take on Batman its this. He IS Batman. He doesn't struggle with it. He doesn't desire to have a normal life. Bruce Wayne is the disguise, one that he's shed several times when it no longer served its purpose. All that matters to him is the mission. IT sort of seemed this way in Begins, but then they just went back on it in TDK.

This is one thing that makes me very apprehensive about TDKR. There's no way he would not be Batman for 8 years. It just doesn't make sense. Maybe he has been, and the context of the trailers and leaks just got it wrong.

 

[Devil_666]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

My 2 cents: Rachel was a neccessity because there's a big difference between friends and lovers. Being Batman doesn't affect Bruce Wayne's relationship with Alfred, Fox or Gordon because for the first two, both those guys are actually HELPING with Wayne's Batman persona. And Batman's relationship with Gordon (so far) is essentially one of business. Gordon is a cop, Batman fights crime. Same goal, different methods, mutual partnership. Bruce has had zero problems maintaining those relationships while still running around as Batman.

But with Rachel it was different. He couldn't be with her (or any woman long term) while still being Batman because unlike the relationships he has with Alfred, Fox and Gordon, having an intimate relationship requires time and effort.

When's the last time Alfred, Fox or Gordon complained to Bruce Wayne/Batman that he wasn't spending enough "Quality" time with them? Or that they needed to move on because they felt unfulfilled? Never right? But Rachel obviously did because she started knocking boots with One-Face before he became Two-Face.

So IMO those two movies needed that character to show what Bruce was willing to give up in order to continue being Batman. And to me, that's the key: Dude chose his little costume and gadgets over some vajayjay from his childhood sweetheart.

But that's the character. Bruce Wayne is so obsessed with Batman that he's willing to sacrafice everything else in his life for it. Same reason he had no problem rolling around with kids (in comics/cartoons) and putting their lives in danger. He just doesn't give a ____. When you think about it, dude is selfish and seriously screwed up in the head.

Which is funny because he's like a "good" version of all the villains he faces.

 

[The Mike]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

There was a writer (I forget who) that did a story arc where Batman explains that what fuels him is the search for justice. The inability to bring justice for his parents and the continuing hunt to quell that childhood desire to avenge his parents' deaths seeing every villain as Joe Chill, as every single one as an embodiment of him.

Batman went on fighting no matter what, bruised, battered, if he could walk he'd suit up and head out on patrol. If it's true and we start TDKR with Batman having hung up the suit for 8 years that'll be a tough pill to swallow especially because of that fuel which as been rephrased and repackaged multiple times over.

If the "peace" is because Batman still exists and has been operating just so much in the shadows that Gotham looks cleaner and that Bane is the next big villain like The Joker that took almost a decade to arrive on the scene I'd be better with that.

If I hear "Master Bruce you haven't put on the Batman suit in almost 8 years!" or anything to that liking even accepting that this is the Nolanverse it'll be rough to not be pulled out of the film completely.

 

[intothevoid]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

My 2 cents: Rachel was a neccessity because there's a big difference between friends and lovers. Being Batman doesn't affect Bruce Wayne's relationship with Alfred, Fox or Gordon because for the first two, both those guys are actually HELPING with Wayne's Batman persona. And Batman's relationship with Gordon (so far) is essentially one of business. Gordon is a cop, Batman fights crime. Same goal, different methods, mutual partnership. Bruce has had zero problems maintaining those relationships while still running around as Batman.

But with Rachel it was different. He couldn't be with her (or any woman long term) while still being Batman because unlike the relationships he has with Alfred, Fox and Gordon, having an intimate relationship requires time and effort.

When's the last time Alfred, Fox or Gordon complained to Bruce Wayne/Batman that he wasn't spending enough "Quality" time with them? Or that they needed to move on because they felt unfulfilled? Never right? But Rachel obviously did because she started knocking boots with One-Face before he became Two-Face.

So IMO those two movies needed that character to show what Bruce was willing to give up in order to continue being Batman. And to me, that's the key: Dude chose his little costume and gadgets over some vajayjay from his childhood sweetheart.

But that's the character. Bruce Wayne is so obsessed with Batman that he's willing to sacrafice everything else in his life for it. Same reason he had no problem rolling around with kids (in comics/cartoons) and putting their lives in danger. He just doesn't give a ____. When you think about it, dude is selfish and seriously screwed up in the head.

Which is funny because he's like a "good" version of all the villains he faces.

That's exactly the thing - dude is mental, he's just an error of judgement away from becoming the very thing he fights against. That was the whole point of the Joker in TDK IMO. To showcase this.

 

[RyanSD]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

There was a writer (I forget who) that did a story arc where Batman explains that what fuels him is the search for justice. The inability to bring justice for his parents and the continuing hunt to quell that childhood desire to avenge his parents' deaths seeing every villain as Joe Chill, as every single one as an embodiment of him.

Batman went on fighting no matter what, bruised, battered, if he could walk he'd suit up and head out on patrol. If it's true and we start TDKR with Batman having hung up the suit for 8 years that'll be a tough pill to swallow especially because of that fuel which as been rephrased and repackaged multiple times over.

If the "peace" is because Batman still exists and has been operating just so much in the shadows that Gotham looks cleaner and that Bane is the next big villain like The Joker that took almost a decade to arrive on the scene I'd be better with that.

If I hear "Master Bruce you haven't put on the Batman suit in almost 8 years!" or anything to that liking even accepting that this is the Nolanverse it'll be rough to not be pulled out of the film completely.

Agreed. That's my biggest concern. If it is that way, in kind of a pseudo- Dark Knight Returns way, I think it'll really take away from the Batman character in these films. So he stops Joker and Two-Face and just gives up? Guess we'll all find out July 20th.

 

[Maglor]

Re: The Dark Knight Rises

I do believe that when Fox dies in TDKR I will be moved.

^^^The reason I have been staying out of this thread.

Thanks for the spoiler.