The Dark Knight Trilogy

Started by Sci, May 13, 2007, 09:19:38 AM

Author
The Dark Knight Trilogy (Read 2,573,075 times)

SiL

SiL

#18570
Correct, there was more than one.

kwisatz

kwisatz

#18571
Its been years since i saw it, but i thought there was only one, which then of course heavily implies...

But maybe I missed something, dunno... but otherwise why would the film show us in the end that the auto pilot had been repaired on some random Bat... why would BW repair the auto pilot on one Bat and then take another one?  :D

edit: ah maybe whats confusing you here: The Bat is meant to be repaired before the whole bomb showdown, its not like LF is asking a guy after the bomb accident if the auto pilot system has been repaired and he answeres: "Yes, we got a repaired one standing in the garage!"

stephen

stephen

#18572
Quote from: kwisatz on Nov 10, 2017, 01:06:53 AM
Its been years since i saw it, but i thought there was only one, which then of course heavily implies...

But maybe I missed something, dunno... but otherwise why would the film show us in the end that the auto pilot had been repaired on some random Bat... why would BW repair the auto pilot on one Bat and then take another one?  :D

Well IF there was two, then he fixed the autopilot on both.

The question is why would there be two?  Well there was more then one tumbler so why not.

It just struck me the last time I watched it as a bit weird but there is obviously meant to be at least two Bat's.

kwisatz

kwisatz

#18573
edit: ah maybe whats confusing you here: The Bat is meant to be repaired before the whole bomb showdown, its not like LF is asking a guy after the bomb accident if the auto pilot system has been repaired and he answeres: "Yes, we got a repaired one standing in the garage!"


Its really been long, but i dont remember i ever had the impression there being two. There were a lot of tumblers yes, but The Bat was a prototype, so why would there be two?

What gave you the impression in the first place, cause im quite certain there are never being shown two on screen simultaneously.

stephen

stephen

#18574
Quote from: kwisatz on Nov 10, 2017, 01:14:53 AM
What gave you the impression in the first place, cause im quite certain there are never being shown two on screen simultaneously.

Well at the end Fox is standing there in front of a Bat with two guys and Fox says something along the lines of "I just want to know what I could of done to fix the autopilot" - one of the guys answers that it was fixed and Fox asks by who and the reply was Bruce Wayne.

The implication in all of this is that Batman put the Bat into auto pilot to fly the bomb out to sea. That Bat was therefore obviously destroyed in the explosion.  So if Fox is standing in front of a Bat it can only be a second Bat. They don't have to be seen on screen together for there to be two.  And up until that last scene, there was no mention of a second Bat at all.

kwisatz

kwisatz

#18575
AH they are standing in front of another one ok, i didnt remember that.

I guess its a bit of spoon-feeding going on here. Because otherwise the question would arouse how would they know that the auto pilot system had been actually repaired, they wouldnt and LF therefore couldnt drop the line.

Im not sure the whole thing creates some kind of plothole cause im fairly certain that BW parked the original Bat on some rooftop and i assumed he repaired the auto pilot from there so, how would another Bat presumably stored in the HQ be also upgraded? (maybe we can assume that BW somehow hacked into Wayne Enterprise data base or something?)

From a pure narrative perspective i think its kinda weak. The second one really then is only present in that scene to make it possible for LF to deliver that line and add fuel to the implication game.

Maybe im completely wrong though, as i said its been a long time.

stephen

stephen

#18576
You're right it's strictly there as a way for Fox to drop the line.

I'm assuming that Bruce Wayne fixed the auto pilot way back before he even took it out.

kwisatz

kwisatz

#18577
I guess maybe it works best if we assume that BW fixed the auto pilot system right after or very shortly after LF introduced him to the prototype, therefore affecting every Bat there is. Its a bit of a stretch casue what LF and an army of engineers couldnt do in months/years he delivers in 2 days, but hey hes BATMAN and i read somewhere that it never was Nolans intent in the first place to make the whole thing "realistic".  :D

Scorpio

Scorpio

#18578
I prefer to think he died, because that ending is so silly otherwise.

KiramidHead

KiramidHead

#18579
I like that they gave Batman a happy ending.

Scorpio

Scorpio

#18580
A heroic sacrifice/saving Gotham and having your own statue is pretty happy though.

kwisatz

kwisatz

#18581
I think you can argue that the BATMAN actually died.

But for Waynes overall arc i found it quite fitting that he finally was able to live without the mask which he does, in the moment he actually is able to control his fear (where he deliberately uses it in the pit to rise). Hes now in full control of his fear and you could argue thats the moment where he no longer needs the mask to live.

Therefore i find it quite consequent to let the man behind the mask actually survive in the end.

Im not a huge fan of Rises overall. Dark Knight is a masterpiece though!

Scorpio

Scorpio

#18582
I thought that whole idea was done better in Batman Forever.

The idea being, Batman is his pain and he tried to give up being Batman.  Same as TDK/TDKR.

In Batman Forever, though, at the end he states "I'm both Bruce Wayne and Batman.  Not because I have to be, but because I choose to be."

CHOOSE being the key word.  He chose Batman.


kwisatz

kwisatz

#18583
I think "control" is the wrong word for what happens in Rises. BW is finally going through the bottom of his worst fear (bottom of the pit -> katharsis), he couldve died right there but he survived and is now finally able to actually climb out of his psychotic hole. But that also means leaving BATMAN behind because actually healing means vanishing for this alter ego.

Now its quite the opposite of choosing then: by finally mentally recovering hes automatically giving up BATMAN. The mask cannot exists without the traumatized mindset underlying it.

One could argue that in Forever BWs traumatic state of mind couldve therefore never been as deep as in Nolans trilogy, because you can not choose to be traumatized in one moment and not to be in another. You are seriously mentally ill or you are not.

Besides choosing to be BATMAN sounds a little bit too Elizabeth Shawey to me.  :D

Scorpio

Scorpio

#18584
Quote from: kwisatz on Nov 10, 2017, 02:53:34 AM

One could argue that in Forever BWs traumatic state of mind couldve therefore never been as deep as in Nolans trilogy, because you can not choose to be traumatized in one moment and not to be in another. You are seriously mentally ill or you are not.


Forever goes much deeper than that. 



Yes this is a deleted scene but it's Bruce Wayne's turning point.

He faces his demons and still chooses to be Batman.

In Nolan trilogy it's always like Batman is a burden to Bruce Wayne and he wants out.

In Batman Forever, Batman is the way he tortures himself as he blames himself for his parent's deaths.  Same thing, but he gets over the trauma, yet still realises Batman is part of his identity and doesn't give it up.

AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News