Lord Lucien
Lets all love Lain
Originally posted by Esau Cairn
But by Batman's "character logic", he's a driven force to avenge his parents & stop the innocents from becoming victims themselves. His "ultimate goal" is to search for an inner peace that will forever be beyond his reach or understanding. Every writer that has written a Batman comic has always grounded Batman as an angst driven hero...his crime fighting on the street level would sometimes lead up to mobs & organised crime (busting petty drug dealers then following the trail to the suppliers/villains...)By your logic it would be pointless & a studio marketing waste to show Rocky's "minor" fights & just go straight to the main antagonist.
Nolan's focus was simply on a rich bored vigilante motivated by organised crime that threatened his own empire.
I mean, TDKR...there really felt no motivation as to why Batman wanted to save Gotham showing more passion & interest in Selina as his reason to go back to Gotham.
(paragraph 1) Batman's motivations in the comics and other media are irrelevant to me when discussing the motivations of this series' rendition. It's a separate variation of the character, and I've nothing against alternate takes. Nolan's Batman isn't shown to be hung up too much on his parents' death (not after he dons the suit, anyway). He's more focused on continuing his father's legacy on helping the people of the city, just in a more direct, brutish way via pain and fear. Nolan's Bruce cares about ridding the city of organized crime, the same organized crime that is responsible for the city's suffering. Something his dear departed father also cared about. He's not angst ridden over his death, he's moved past it by stepping in the same shoes. We've seen the angsty, tortured Batman, we don't need another film to focus so heavy on it again. Begins did show it at the beginning, but it also showed Bruce moving beyond it; growing as a person and establishing the beginning of the long-coveted character arc that the sequels so readily forgot about--ergo, boring Batman. 🙁
EDIT addendum: consider also that this was a finite number of films. Unlike the TV series or comics, it had to have an end goal (even if it wasn't relevant in #3) that... well, had to end. It can't have monsters or freaks and still be realistic, and it also can't have nothing beyond stopping muggings or drug dealers. It had to mean something further, thus the theme of rooting our corruption and criminality as a whole--fighting the cause, not just the symptoms. That's a much more poignant point to make in a film, and they did it well. For the most part.
(paragraph 2) What? No no, you're missing my point. The "minor fights" are necessary. Very necessary. They set stakes, build tensions, show off the characters. And Begins did that. A movie (or game, or novel, or comic or what have you) would be so boring if it began and ended with a climax. You need to establish the fights on the streets and have them lead to something bigger, more impactful. Fear-mongering and skulking in the back alleys led Batman to Falcone which led to Scarecrow which led Ra's. A tier process which started small and rose in stakes and skill. Begins did that beautifully, TFK showed the limitations of the style when faced with unpredictability, and TDKR made Batman in to an ubermensch. 🙁
(paragraph 3) "threatened his own empire"? Either you totally misread Bruce's intentions or you're thinking of another movie. His selfishness was something that was lamentably ignored in TDK (it was brought up in Begins, but should have been a focus in TDK). He was genuinely motivated to save the city in Begins (hence why he was so willing to betray and kill "Ra's"😉 and not a whiff of "imperialism" is present in the character's desires. As of the sequel though, he was clearly all about getting Rachel. A welcome flaw in his character, as such tunnel-visioned motivation for altruism could have been a great discussion on the merits of his vigilantism. But that was ignored, and Bruce seemed to get over Rachel's death pretty quickly, so that was a waste too. I.e. boring Batman. 🙁
Good Joker though, and that's what matters.
Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
thanks for the laughs, not belittling people. telling truth which is something you cannot understand yet alone comprehend.. the movie making industry is a business something to always remember.. you simply cannot handle the truth that while you didn;t like these films the millions of people around the world who paid their money liked them.. how else do you think that that whether it is these Batman films or Man of Steel or any other film that is successful .. I hope you understand what multiple means because that is what happens when a movie makes a boatload of cash. people [b]LIKED what they saw and their is no denying that.. THAT IS A FACT.. a fact who are having trouble with.. I should not have to explain this to you.. the films had great quality to them so remember while you can;t handle that, i can.. I have never ever said that Nolan's Bat trilogy didn;t have flaws, all films do, I simply have looked past them and enjoyed the films [/B]
My God, man. Just stop it.