For the greater good

[swatkat]

The other day Gail Simone and Greg Rucka had a very interesting conversation about TDKR on Twitter that I couldn't but help save for posterity:

‏
@GailSimone
I loved Dark Knight Rises and Avengers both tremendously...but man, are they opposite films.

The Batman films spend nine hours explaining how Batman could exist. Avengers takes ten seconds to say, superheroes exist, here we go.

Good lord. Yes, I know there were movies preceding Avengers. My point is, no time is spent on credibility in the film at all, which is fun.

‏@ruckawriter
@braak @GailSimone Disagree. Marvel spent 6 movies introducing and defining their characters, never apologizing for them.

‏@GailSimone
@ruckawriter You think Dark Knight Rises apologizes for Batman?

@ruckawriter
@GailSimone haven't seen rises. Feel strongly that the Nolan Batman movies I have seen are always vaguely ashamed that he's called Batman.

And I feel they spend far too much time "justifying" that.

‏@GailSimone
@ruckawriter Hmmm. That's interesting. Not sure I agree, I think the message is that there's a huge cost to being Batman.

They do spend a lot of time, but it seems more like rationalizing to me, than justifying.

‏@ruckawriter
@GailSimone I don't get that in the first two. I feel like they're shouting at me "See? He -could- really do all this!"

as if we don't know Batman is a comic book character. -shrug- Just my opinion

‏@GailSimone
@ruckawriter You didn't get that? He loses his home, his family, his love, just in the first two, right?

It's something to think about.

did you not like the films because of that?

I like both approaches; a, superheroes exist, here's a story, and b, here's why superheroes exist, and it's PART of the story.

‏@ruckawriter
@GailSimone I feel I should clarify - I appreciate the films for the skill of their making, and especially the performances in them...

…but I cannot help feel that the filmmakers themselves are running hell-bent-for-leather away from the words "comic books."

@GailSimone
@ruckawriter If they are, why are so many scenes directly from the comics? There are direct QUOTES for Pete's sake.

They never quite finished the conversation to my satisfaction, but it's still great seeing the two of them discuss the movies from their perspective. I'm on Rucka's side on this one -- but then I'm always on Rucka's side on almost everything.

I should also probably edit the tl;dr discussion zorana, A and I had on Facebook of all places on TDKR and Korra, and save it in a post here for posterity's sake. Hmm.

Comments

[thirdblindmouse]

Rises continues a number of themes (and disjunctions) from the previous movies, but it is the only entry in the Nolan trilogy that isn't ultimately about the existence of a Batman. Batman Begins: "Batman could totally exist in the real(ish) world!" The Dark Knight: "But should he??" The Dark Knight Rises: "More stuff happens!" So I think the third has the greatest similarity to the Marvel movies in that respect, taking the existence of totally awesome superheroes!!! as a given. But it still takes place in the context of the previous two movies, and that's why Batman in the Nolanverse is so easy to laugh at -- because they haven't contemplated the possibility of laughing with. They are shouting, Stop laughing, guys; I'm really awesome, okay?, while the Marvel movies are shouting, Woohoo! Maybe that's why Bruce Wayne hangs up his cape at the end of two out of three Nolan movies, including the one that was otherwise about him returning to superheroics.

What I would like is a liveaction movie which acknowledges that a guy who considers dressing up as a bat a reasonable reaction to any scenario other than an invitation to a costume ball is a really weird person. Not just a stoic leading man who takes his duty super seriously, but a genuine eccentric. (In this version, the audience would be forced to acknowledge that Alfred is not as much of a straight man as people usually take him as. He works for this madman willingly. He raised this madman. If he weren't mad in some way himself, Batman would not have happened.)

[swatkat]

TDKR is "more stuff happens", with a dash of "he's still weird okay, we're sorry, we're trying to fix that". Is it a surprise that Batman spends have the movie not being Batman and ends it with retirement and a happily ever after?


What I would like is a liveaction movie which acknowledges that a guy who considers dressing up as a bat a reasonable reaction to any scenario other than an invitation to a costume ball is a really weird person. Not just a stoic leading man who takes his duty super seriously, but a genuine eccentric. (In this version, the audience would be forced to acknowledge that Alfred is not as much of a straight man as people usually take him as. He works for this madman willingly. He raised this madman. If he weren't mad in some way himself, Batman would not have happened.)

YES TO THIS. If we can celebrate Sherlock Holmes' eccentricity, why not Bruce Wayne's?