Batman is NOT a quitter.
Honestly, I would give this movie zero stars as a comic-book movie.
I couldn't get over Batman being a quitter (and the parallels to The Dark Knight Returns and No Man's Land are ludicrous). I'll give you Knight Fall (but that happens in the bat cave, not some sewer, in the comic. And, Bane isn't someone's lackey. He is a strategist that weakens Batman to the point of complete exhaustion by releasing ever Gotham inmate, Batman has to round them all up (not sleeping nor eating), and than Bane breaks Batman). Bane uses Batman's obsession to fight crime (his motivation) against him. Nolan's Batman is a quitter. A nod is not the same thing as an adaptation.
“And I swear by the spirit of my parents to avenge their deaths by spending the rest of my life warring on all criminals.”
-Bruce Wayne [Detective Comics #27]Batman is not a quitter:
Making Batman a quitter flies in the face of the Batman mythos and everything that makes the character great. You don't mess with something started by <b>Bob Kane</b> that has been fundamental to the character for over 75 years, and don't expect a backlash by fans.
The Nolanverse Batman movies were written, directed, and produced by people that know nothing about the characters.
This Batman was Batman for a total of 2 years, and he (Bruce Wayne) whined the whole time that he hated being Batman. This movie was all about Bruce Wayne fighting his demons and freeing himself from the burden of being the Dark Knight. The Batman from the comic is Batman, Bruce Wayne is a mask that Batman wears. If you don't understand that, you don't understand the comics. So, put down your game pad, stop being a Nolanite sheeple, and read a graphic novel or two.
Oh yeah, and the Nolanverse sucks!
And, I might be in the minority (since I'm a purist), but I don't hate this movie as a movie. Nolan is a fine director (see: Inception). I HATE it as a comic-book movie. Batman isn't James Bond, he doesn't need a Q (see: Fox). He is smarter than the idiot that was portrayed by Christian Bale.
There is so much wrong with this movie as a comic book movie that it angers me. And, the biggest problem is all these kids who have never picked up a Batman comicbook, who watch these movies, and are brainwashed into believing that this is Batman. Furthermore, those of you that try to link this to the comics, you need to stop. You are wrong.
1-2). No Man's Land follow the events of Cataclysm. I don't remember an earthquake in the movie. So, No Man's Land is a big fat 'no.' The bridge doesn't count. I can find other comics with bridges being blown up.
3). The Dark Knight Returns, Bruce has fought crime for over 30 years (not 2), and he was pushed into retirements by the death of Jason Todd AND Lex Luthor via his control of the strongest superheroes like Superman and Wonder Woman (Earth 31 check it out). Plus, when he comes back he abandons his Bruce Wayne persona, and becomes Batman full-time. He doesn't run off to the south of Paris with some girl that tricked him into an arse beating.
What you guys are doing is the equivalent of this:
That was fun. And, it carries the same validity.
The truth is I see some more parallels with Batman 1966 than the comics. Seriously:
I got to say that this movie fails as a comicbook movie. But, it also fails as a movie:
And, how about the acting?!?
It was wooden, most of the actors looked like they had better things to do. It's like they didn't try.
In fact, Marion's death scene deserves a Razzie:
She has hordes of people imitating her on youtube. If you don't believe me go to youtube, and search "Die Like Marion"
And, speaking about that death scene. Batman kills her accidentally because he is running out of time (a bomb is going to explode). Instead of saying, "I'm Bruce Wayne, thanks, I gotta run" , Batman decides to waste time giving a stupid speech?:
Jim Gordon: I never cared who you were...
Batman: I know.
Jim Gordon: ...but shouldn't the people of Gotham know who the hero was that saved their city?
Batman: A hero can be anyone. Even a man doing something as simple and reassuring as putting a coat around a little boy's shoulders to let him know that the world hadn't ended.
[takes off in the Bat]
Really, he kills her because he is running out of time, but he has time to play The Riddler?
Oh, and Gordon doesn't figure out that Bruce is Batman, but Blake did when Bruce Wayne gave him the look (not the I like little boys look) the other look. A seasoned cop is an idiot (see: James Gordon), but an orphan boy has tons of intuition. The fact that Batman and Bruce Wayne disappear for the same amount of time doesn't trigger any questions by anyone? Obviously, this is the real world that Nolan set up in his movies.
The biggest problem with this trilogy is that you can't have it both ways. You can't be serious and realistic when it's convenient, yet fill it with fantasy when it's convenient. You can't have it both ways. It's either a realistic take on Batman or it isn't. The defenders of this movie always argue from both sides. You can't have it both ways. It's either one or the other. And, regardless which you pick this movie and trilogy can be deconstructed to nothing more than over hyped cow manure.
I can continue going, but I'm sure that my contrarian opinion is unwanted. So, I'll leave you with this: