Next month a Special Edition Box Set of Christopher Nolan's 'Dark Knight' Trilogy is released here in the UK (you lucky Americans have already got it), and given the recent controversy about Batman's appearance in the 'Man of Steel' sequel, Batman on film is still a strong talking point for many film fans like myself. Whilst initially my biggest problem with the decision to include Batman in a Superman film was more down to the fact the makers were seemingly ignoring Nolan's trilogy, since then I've had the opportunity to re-view 'The Dark Knight Rises'. I only managed to catch this once at the cinema, and although at the time I really enjoyed it (despite the problems the film has with structure and pacing), watching it again over a year later I found myself getting very frustrated with the film.
At the time of release critics were generally positive about 'TDKR', though there was one stinging review which caused no small amount of controversy - that of aintitcool.com's Harry Knowles. Mr Knowles is admired and derided in equal measure for his passionate, and admittedly nerdy, approach he takes to reviewing films - his reviews are normally hyperbolic and enthusiastic. As a passionate film fan I can relate to this (I'm not above resorting to geeky hyperbole myself!), even if his writing isn't likely to garner the same respect of the likes of Ebert or Kael! Harry Knowles surprised a lot of people when 'TDKR' came out by savaging the film - and what most people took objection to where that his criticisms where not based on elements a critic would normally find faults with - direction, acting, cinematography, editing, etc. His review was a furious discourse on how badly felt the film had portrayed Batman.
You see, as well as being a passionate movie fan, Mr Knowles seems to be a huge comic book fan as well, and a lot of his anger was based on decisions that were made in the story and the portrayal of Batman by the writers of 'TDKR'. Far from being 'the world's greatest detective' of the comic, and a ninja-trained fighter who uses his environment and wits to best his opponent, Mr Knowles argues that Batman's fight with Bane midway through the movie completely ignores all this, and is - paraphrasing his words - 'the worst bat-fight ever put on screen'. He also has an issue with the set-up at the start of the film, which has Bruce Wayne on an 8-year self-imposed exile, having chosen do hang up the Bat-cape following the events of 'The Dark Knight'; Mr Knowles argues that, as a character, Bruce Wayne is so driven not just by the need to fight crime, but almost psychologically dependent on being Batman - he would simply not be able to withdraw from being Batman, short of being physically incapacitated or dying, basically.
At the time I found I couldn't agree with this assessment of 'TDKR' - I really felt that the portrayal of Bruce Wayne was in keeping with the characterisation and plot which Nolan and his screenwriters had established with the previous films. After all, you had a situation where Batman had been driven underground by taking the fall for the death of Harvey Dent, and Bruce Wayne had lost the woman he loved. Also, Nolan wanted to portray a realistic and very human version of Batman - so having Bruce Wayne in a physically deteriorated state at the start of the film is in some ways a logical depiction of the toll being Batman would likely take on anyone's body. I also felt the criticism that Nolan was being disrespectful to the comics was unfair, as 'TDKR's plot takes inspiration from a number of story-lines from the comics.
I admit though did have problems with the film on other levels - it's a bit bloated (I think at least one of the prison-set scenes could have been trimmed altogether), and it feels a bit preposterous and over-the-top coming after the more grounded (but no less intense) 'The Dark Knight'. In fact, following that film - arguably THE best Comic Book/Super Hero movie of all - is a problem in itself; I think any film was going to struggle to compare to it, but I think the plot pushes the edges of the realism and believability Nolan was pushing for, in comparison to 'The Dark Knight'. I think if it had been a straight sequel to 'Batman Begins' it would have been considered a stronger sequel. Ultimately, at the time I didn't think these flaws derailed the film in any way, and make it a worthy part of one of the best film Trilogies ever made.
Despite this, over a year on, my feelings towards the film have changed. As I watched it for the second time I found myself getting frustrated at the central characters. At times, the protagonists are made to look, well, pretty useless really. I get that Bane is a dangerous villain, after the portrayal of The Joker - one of THE greatest movie villains of all time - a character was needed who was capable of being not just a physical threat to Batman, but also a figure who can command fear and respect enough to motivate an army to hold an entire city hostage. But you shouldn't need to have everyone be inept to do that. Would NO ONE in the city's Police or Authorities be able to pick up at least SOME suggestion of an army of terrorists amassing arms and bombs under the city? Like I said, it pushes the levels of credibility, which seems counter to the realism being aimed for. I also find myself beginning to agree with Harry Knowles' criticism of the Batman/Bane fight. Yes, Batman is physically out-matched by Bane, even if he HAD been at the peak of physical fitness (clearly he's not in this film). But I think Mr Knowles is correct when he argues that the Batman of the comics - even of other Batman films, including (to some degrees) Nolan's own - would have approached the fight tactically. Yes, it was a trap, yes he was caged - but Batman IS 'The World's Greatest Detective', he has military grade gadgets available to him; surely he would have made more use of the environment to try and gain an advantage of Bane? At this point, when people begin to argue that this film does Batman a disservice, I can see their point.
I guess that is something which is up for debate at the end of the day.
But where I ultimately feel Nolan did Batman the biggest disservice, one which led to the situation we have today with recent casting controversies, is the way in which he concluded his Trilogy. On the one hand, he has really brought his own stamp to Batman, really taken the character and stories and realised a version which is perfect for the current era (post the 'War on Terror' and the 'Economic Collapse'); in which case, if he wants to mark a close to his version, then the films are successful enough that some would say he's entitled to do that. But on the other, Batman is a very enduring character with many great story-lines - and villains he's had to take on - that simply 'concluding' the story simply doesn't feel right. I know that with the closing shot, and a couple of other lines of dialogue in 'TDKR' ("...Batman could be anyone..."), Nolan has tried to leave some space for someone to carry on with the character (as well as giving a nod to a story-line from the comics where Robin takes on Batman's role) - but at the end of the day Batman is most strongly associated with Bruce Wayne. It is, after all, Bruce Wayne's psychological damage which arguably made him become, and continue to be, Batman, and that makes it hard to make a Batman movie without him.
Batman is bigger than three movies - in terms of character and characterisation, story-lines, setting - so that is the biggest reason I feel that with 'TDKR' Christopher Nolan has ultimately done Batman a slight disservice.
Having said that, the film is still a tremendous action thriller, and it caps off a brilliant trilogy. I still think it's a shame that the closure of the trilogy means that the 'Man of Steel' sequel will have to pretend those films didn't actually happen, to a certain degree. However, over the years there have been many writers (comic, novel, screen and even video game) who have interpreted Batman in different ways, and found interesting and memorable story-lines with which to explore this enduring character. It is for that reason alone I am being cautiously optimistic about his next big screen appearance, and that's why I think cinema-goers will be able to enjoy many more films featuring Gotham's Dark Knight. And perhaps someday, somebody will make another Batman film which can equal 'The Dark Knight'...
