General Batman discussion thread.

[The Romulan Republic]

I don't know why people give Dark Knight Rises a hard time, except that the previous film set the bar so high.

It has its flaws, mostly that it has some plot-holes that leave it feeling a bit thin, and that it feels like it should have been two movies that were instead squeezed together (part one being essentially a loose adaptation of Knightfall, and part two being a loose adaptation of No Man's Land).

But its not really bad, in my opinion, and I actually rather liked the ending, which shows the narrative advantages of having a short, stand-alone series.

In the comics, the status quo in Gotham can never fundamentally, permanently change.

But because Nolan's films were a self-contained story that ended with DKR, it allowed Batman to do something his comics counterpart can never actually do:

Win.

And they say that the Nolan films are dark.

All that said, I'd have been interested to see how they might have continued things from there, if they'd decided to use the Nolan Trilogy as the basis for a DCCU, rather than starting over (as I believe was discussed at one point).

I've even thought about writing a DC/Justice League fanfic set in the Nolan-verse.

[Dînadan]

On DKR, am I the only person on the planet that didn’t have any trouble understanding Bane?

[The Romulan Republic]

I could usually understand him fine.

Again, I think TDK probably gets a lot of criticism just because The Dark Knight was such a tough act to follow. I particularly feel sorry for Bane's actor, because no matter how good he was, he was going to be measured against Heath Ledger, the only actor to ever win an Oscar for a super hero film.

[FaxModem1]

Dark Knight Rises didn't make sense, or made less sense than it's previous interpretations.

Batman Begins had the Microwave Emitter silliness and no reason it wasn't boiling everyone alive.

Dark Knight had Joker's plan going off way too perfectly as well as Batman's Big Brother cell phone technology.

Dark Knight Rises had CIA agents who didn't check to see who they had, an entire movie's plotline that we seem to have missed about the downfall of the mafia and the harsh measures they took to win, Bruce's instant recovery from both spinal injury and his knees wearing out, the anti-Occupy stance the film took, the stupidity shown by Gotham becoming an independent city state, the lack of economic or radioactive fallout from their New York equivalent being held hostage for months as well as a radioactive weapon detonating in the ocean on the Eastern seaboard, how either the League's prison is within walking distance of Gotham or Bruce is able to teleport from one part of the planet to the other without any money, how a cop who has no training aside from as a policeman, wealth, or gadgets is supposed to be able to continue Bruce's legacy, and stating that lying to the public is the right course of action, and you only get in trouble if you try to tell the truth, and how Gotham is so stupid as to take a terrorist at his word while they're being held at gunpoint so as to believe that Gordon lied about Two Face.

Also, Batman didn't win, he ran away and justified it by giving it to someone he's practically a stranger to.

[The Romulan Republic]

My sense was that the old crime-ridden Gotham was largely gone at the start of DKR- the city was mostly doing fine without Batman, even if it was through "tough on crime" bullshit built on a lie.

It was only the League of Shadows coming back that necessitated Bruce coming out of retirement.

Now, granted, Gotham has fallen apart by the end of the film, but if the institutions can be rebuilt to function as well as they did at the start of the film (admittedly a large assumption, particularly after Bain reveals the Dent lie from TDK), then you can say Batman won.

Anyway, DKR's plot issues can pretty much just be filed under "typical action movie shit". It didn't ruin the movie for me. Particularly the logic and competency-related issues, because you get that so often in real life. I mean, I can completely buy CIA agents doing something mind-bogglingly clumsy.

I'd honestly criticize it more for the pacing issues, and the fact that it felt like two different films sandwiched together.

[FaxModem1]

To each their own, but it ruined the film for me. The issues with the prior films made me stop and think afterwards, the ones in DKR were so numerous and so major that I couldn't suspend disbelief.

[The Romulan Republic]

So, having reread The Killing Joke (probably prompted in part by this discussion), some thoughts:

-The dialog, while often very good, isn't quite as good as I recalled. Though that may be just me remember it a certain way, and being disappointed when my recollections don't perfectly fit the reality.

-The treatment of women in it definitely comes off as needlessly cruel and creepy at times (though the same could be said for some of the male characters), though I think some of that is on the artist, not just Moor.

However, women don't get treated nearly as badly, in some respects, as people with disabilities or physical abnormalities do (see the Joker's entourage of circus sideshow "freaks", who are basically there to be props for the Joker/evil because they look creepy). At least the major female characters are made somewhat sympathetic. I'm surprised TKJ doesn't get a lot more shit for this, as well as the gender issues.

It makes me want to write a fan fic from the POV of some of the background characters, just to remind everyone that they're, you know, people. Plus, I find it interesting to look at how the "ordinary" people in these universes view the superheroes and super villains.

-Jim Gordon is the real hero of the story, not Batman or Joker. Batman largely fails in his goals. Gordon is the one who proves the Joker wrong.

Edit:

Another major point I'd like to note, relating to the discussion of weather the Joker is evil, or just sick.

The Joker may have originally been driven insane by the horrific circumstances he experienced (whatever they actually were). But at the end of this story, he seems to genuinely realize that he is in the wrong, or at least to regret what he has become, before rejecting Batman's offer of redemption. Ultimately, I think, because madness is easier for him than the alternative. He also acknowledges earlier in the story that he is himself aware that he is mad.

In which case... the Joker is responsible for his actions, in my opinion, at least partially. Even if he didn't originally choose to be a monster, he did in this story. He chose violent insanity. That makes him, in my opinion, evil, not merely sick.