It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
THANK YOU! Somebody noticed that too. The film has a mind-blowing cast, but that guy is so over the top I couldn't take it. It was right at the start of the film, and I was hoping the rest of the casting for minor roles wasn't like that. Good god was he put on. He belted out every word like he had to emphasize everything and most of the time he sounded like he was selling me a car.
Nonsense. Surely the fact there is such discussion about the subject confirms the nature of the ending. I don't think people are reading into it and if Nolan had wanted absolute finality he certainly would not have written and shot the ending in the way he did. It was done purely for one very distinct reason, to allow the audience to consider the possibilities.
The ending I took was that Bruce is alive and that John Blake emphasises the point that Batman and Bruce Wayne are not one and the same. The Batman is Legend, a symbol, immortal, it's Bruce's legacy, a gift to Gotham.
I don't know whether I'm right but it's the story I choose. Everyone has an opinion and frankly what's more interesting than that?
Spot on!
or will it?
Studio ending? It was reported that the studio hated this ending.
Well he already was Robin in the film, so the edning shows him being risen up/promoted to become the dark knight. whatever "a dark knight" may be.
Sorry, but I think you read my sentance wrong. What I meant was that this ending is final. It is not ambiguously the slightest. So, we agree :)
I agree. Batman is alive at the end. How else to explain the ponderous and obvious "autopilot" references in the film?
Ah, my apologies. I only paid attention to your last sentence and the latter "ambiguous".
Robin was his birth name- it was just a wink to the audience. It's just his name.
<center>This is Robin
in the same sense that this is Robin
</center>
And Bruce led him to the Batcave-- what could be in there besides more Bat-Suits? Remember in Batman Begins 'at least we'll have spares' :))
*Also, just remembered: in the ending montage we see Gordon go to the rooftop and he finds that the Batsignal had been mysteriously repaired.
I´ll go the Endlish version tomorrow, maybe I´ll manage to forget this horrible nightmare.
Thank you!!
And WB have confirmed a REBOOT in 2015, not a continuation.
i hope it's like this
I know all the evidence points to him being Batman, the whole symbol idea, etc. But I just like to think he'll be Robin, I don't want anybody other than Bruce to be Batman, and him being Robin would make sense.
're-boot' but letting Nolan do it for them.
At least its a very plausible route for them to take. That way they can bring in a new guy, to have his own take, with this new Batman character, but the two Batmans (Bale's and Levitt's) are still linked in the reality of Gotham.
Now breath out. And back in.
Truly a masterpiece.
I'm wondering if they'll use Levitt or just start again. I prefer having Bruce Wayne as Batman, but I don't really want another reboot/origin story, so maybe I'd rather have Levitt be Batman. But then that ruins the Robin ending I like to believe.
Or barring that, he could have killed off one of the major good guys: Oldman or Hathaway or Freeman or Caine. When the "highest-ranking" good guy to get killed is Modine, you have a serious imbalance in the movie's stakes.
I disagree. It wasnt just a wink thet his name was Robin. He was the Robin character during the entire movie, he just wasnt called it. He helped Batman, he had a hopeful and positive demenor, ha became Batmans protege of sorts. = what Robin in the comics are. Blake is Nolans version of Robin. I dont get how this isnt clear to everyone.
I agree with this. In a way, Nolan ingeniously solved the debate of "Batman should have a sidekick/Batman shouldn't have a sidekick," by giving him a sidekick throughout the movie but not revealing it until the very end. Two lone wolves or a hero and his sidekick...it's really up to your interpretation.
;)
I will argue that perhaps one of the best things about Nolan's trilogy is that it does indeed leave a couple things up to your own imagination. So really we can all be right!
Personally I'm of the belief that Bruce Wayne has hung up the cowl and set John Blake as his successor. To the public, nobody would even consider that this Batman running around is any one different than the one that's always been around (reminds me of the Dread-Pirate Roberts).
Blake wouldn't be 'Robin' if Batman is out of the picture, you know what I mean? That's why I firmly believe that Blake is the next Batman.
Batman movies in the past have always left it open for there to be a sequel, but with Nolan's Trilogy, we have seen a complete beginning, middle, and end
However
If a Justice League movie ever comes about it will no doubt be Bruce Wayne (or Batman reboot, whichever comes first)
I'd be interested in seeing a 'Blake-Batman' comic book though!
Nolan very possibly had his cake and ate it too when it comes to the classic Robin character.