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
My main argument roots itself in the fact that Nolan’s Batman trilogy actually gives Bruce Wayne a definitive ending to his time as the Caped Crusader. Better yet, Bruce gets a happy ending, something that’s pretty much impossible to do in his comic interpretation. Let me explain: Chris Nolan actually allows Bruce to move on past his parents’ death and begin living and enjoying life again. Whereas in the comics, Bruce Wayne will forever be tormented by the death of his parents to fuel his war on crime. Because a status quo must be upheld for future generations of readers to be able to pick up a Batman comic and understand it, Bruce Wayne will always be Batman and, as a result, he will always be a miserable human being.
The idea of Bruce Wayne actually being able to get over his parents’ death allowed Chris Nolan and the rest of the crew working on THE DARK KNIGHT TRILOGY the opportunity to really play up one of Batman’s defining themes -- legacy. In the comics, Bruce Wayne has drafted many people into his continual war on those who pray on the fearful. We’ve had five Robins, three Batgirls, a Batwoman, and a large number of other colorful characters carrying on Batman’s tradition of stomping the faces of criminals. However, as long as Batman is around, these characters will always feel secondary, no matter how many mini-series and ongoings they each get to tell you otherwise. Batman will always overshadow all of them and there will never be a true passing of the torch.
In the Nolan-verse, things are different. For starters, we don’t have a bunch of little boys running around in pixie boots. Instead, Batman is left to inspire ordinary folks to stand up against injustice, a theme started in Batman Begins with Jim Gordon, then played with more heavily in The Dark Knight with the impostor Batmen, and finally concluding in The Dark Knight Rises with the entire Gotham City police department and, more specifically, John “Robin” Blake quitting the force because the “structural shackles” of law enforcement permit him from delivering true justice.
The mantle of the Batman is not reserved for Bruce Wayne alone. It can be argued that Christopher Nolan's underlining thesis on Batman is that anyone can serve as Gotham's Dark Knight as long as they have the motivation and dedication to stopping injustice. The position isn't reserved for only orphaned boys, although they seem to gravitate to the role like a fly towards light. As Bruce states in BEGINS, Batman is not a man, because a man can be corrupted or killed. Instead, Batman is an ideal, a symbol that anyone can aspire to, even men wearing hockey pads, though their life expectancy is much shorter.
The idea of Batman being more of a catalyst to inspire those fed up with how the system is operated has always fascinated me more than just seeing Bruce Wayne under the cape and cowl on repeat. I don't see it written anywhere that just because Bruce Wayne donned the costume first in 1939 that he should forever be under it. Isn't it a more powerful statement to the character's value that even when Bruce Wayne is gone, the legend of the Batman lives on?
Now, while Chris Nolan’s Batman films clearly nail the thematics that drive Batman to do what he does, they don’t hit every note perfectly. If there’s one part to Batman that the Nolan-verse films fail to put on proper display it is the actual detective aspect of the character. Nolan’s version of Batman is more a ninja than a super sleuth, content with searching for something on Wikipedia and calling it a day.Furthermore, the Nolan-verse Batman is more reactionary than preemptive; something goes terribly wrong and Batman has to deal with it. In the comics, especially those of Grant Morrison, Batman is a man that has countermeasures to his countermeasures. It’s borderline psychotic how many angles he’s thought of to prevent every possible scenario. The Bruce Wayne of the movies is not like that, outside when he creates the sonar computer to track the Joker.
Those two issues aside, I feel like I could go on for another 2,000 plus words on the subject of what’s absolutely incredible about Chris Nolan’s Batman films -- the supporting cast, the unique takes on iconic villains, the music, etc. But let me bring this to a close by readdressing my original question: is THE DARK KNIGHT TRILOGY the definitive Batman tale? Some might feel differently, but due to the trilogy’s finite (happy) ending for Bruce and the fact that every major theme that makes Batman Batman is present and accounted for, I’m going to say yes.
Chris Nolan and everyone else working on the DARK KNIGHT TRILOGY should be elated with the work they’ve done on these films. They’ve given us a definitive take on the character that doesn’t just rehash exactly what we’ve already read in year’s prior. The films aren’t perfect, but they’re pretty darn close. And if I ever need to prove to someone why Batman is a great character, I can hand him or her these three movies and the point should be made with an exclamation mark.
Great post you thought about it alot. I feel that the Nolan films just used Batman and his mythos instead of making an actual film about Batman. Burton was great, but I feel that he put too much of his style on Batman. However, it sure does come close. I want a film that says, "Oh yeah, that is Batman". Burton, like I said, come close, but oh but too far.
Batman becomes the vampire that ends life on Earth.
No, it ends with Batman victorious. OF COURSE. ;)
:))
Oh that's right, because we all haven't seen Bond fall off the Turkish train and know he fakes his death in all the trailers for Skyfall. If Bond died then why would EON be setting up/preparing for Bond 24 and 25?
Sixty lashes with a wet noodle for you!
:))
Another day in this thread will be torture enough it seems.
Doesn't really answer my question.
Anyway, would you please answer my question?
Does Batman become a vampire like in the comic book of the same name? Is that hard to answer?
Guess you missed it. :-\"