My only argument is this. Isn't part of the entire Batman franchise historically to have loads of different writers and creators put their own twists and bends on the character/characters within the franchise..and to stylize it in their own forms? Is it the die hard fans want certain patterns and historical accuracies to stay consistant to keep some sort of flow to the ongoing story? Or is it about respecting the franchise and it's history?
I'm not sure how you can say Nolan attempted to make something that wasn't a comic book movie. He drew his influences from Batman comic books and more importantly some darker Batman graphic novels and even non Batman related super hero graphic novels. The themes, moods and styles..as he has openly admitted many times. Esp Frank Millers conceptions of the Dark Knight, The Killing joke by Alan Moore and Brian Bolland and to a lesser extent The Watchmen stylization. All clear influences.
Definitely there's been different takes on it in comics,
drastically different takes like the Elseworlds series where the time periods and characters are completely different and which some are entertaining, but all of which are just more of a gimmick than anything close to being considered canon. To me, that's what most of what every live action movie, including Nolan's, has been like, an Elseworld type story. The Penguin actually kinda being sort of a penguin instead of it just being a nickname, Catwoman being resurrected by cats, Batman killing criminals, The Joker killing Bruce's parents, Nolan's insistence on a "real world" backdrop, the Joker and Two-Face being almost completely re-done etc,etc. Which yeah, they're entertaining, but they aren't the definitive take on the story. Ledger played one of the best villains in any recent movie, but I don't think he's the Joker.
It's not that I don't think he respected the character or comics, I know he did, the influences are obvious as you pointed out. Burton didn't even read the comics. It's that he insisted on making it work in the "real world", to make it believable, and it just doesn't work. You hit a wall at different points in all the movies where that takes you out of the movie, at least it did to me. For me, that's what it was like for most of the The Dark Knight Rises, where I was like "WTF Chris, the realism thing out the window now?" Can't have it both ways. He kinda got away with it during the other two movies, found ways around it, but Bane? Catwoman who actually I can't call Catwoman because she's never referred to that in the movie? Talia? Doesn't work.
Batman never really "murdered" Dent. He did however break his rule of not killing anyone even though it was accidental. The entire trilogy from that point (with having to decide btw Rachel and Dent) became about the mental state of the batman and Bruce Wayne and his selfish ego, wrestling with his own self morality and expectations vs social morality and expectations. Pretty much the theme with all the characters in the trilogy. Thus making him The Dark Knight. I might be stretching it lol. That's what makes these types of movies kind of fun.
I'll agree though not sure about wrapping my head around why all the prisoners would be released either. I'll agree thats a stretch within the story line of the 3rd film and would have liked that one to be explained a little fuller. But like you hinted at..it is an alternative universe..it's fantasy. That is a cheap excuse though I agree and that's the easy scape goat for any fantasy writing...which is why i typically don't enjoy fantasy genres. Could have fixed that one somehow with more thought. I'm not saying story lines weren't passive or lazy at points..they def were throughout the trilogy. Sort of had hands tide though as you would need another 2 hours per film to clean everything up better. Or should have made it a 4 parter? Would that have been too much though?
No he could've kept it a trilogy, you just don't even **** around with Bane or Catwoman, and you don't kill off probably the second best villain in all of comics with Two Face, whether or not you knew Ledger was going to suddenly die. That's what I mean when I say he can't have it both ways. You can't be try to be ultra realistic and then have that excuse of every criminal being released because Dent went crazy so now we have to lie. You don't do that bullshit ending just to make some sort of false symbolism with Batman, and then have to wait 8 years for Batman to come back, which the whole point of that, script and writing wise, was just to serve the purpose of the John Blake character to grow up. That's all that was. Nolan already admitted that in the beginning, he knew that's how he had wanted to end the trilogy. That in itself is something that Batman doesn't do. Batman is Batman, he is the true personality, Bruce Wayne becomes just a figure head. There is no wanting to be rid of all it one day, he is it.
We will see what happens when Nolan starts the Robin series which looks like we may see in the future. I hate the character of Robin in all comic book and film form. Not looking forward to those films if they get made. I would much rather see spin offs of other characters in the Batman franchise myself. And who knows we may actually see a 4th Nolan dark knight film in the far future. I doubt it but it was left open which is what appears to be giving some fans boners. Esp those who go looking for hints and go to the batman story telling vaults for ideas. Nolans not dumb he knew exactly what he was doing with these films and how he ended the third. Keep the fan base talking and searching. Keeps his Dark Knight alive.
I don't really like the way he dealt with the whole Robin thing, you either have him or you don't. You don't half ass it. And if you have him, he's a kid, because that shows an important part of Batman's psyche which also was ignored in Nolan's films: he's fucking crazy. But that would also mean getting rid of the whole real world setting, which Nolan didn't want. So he went half ass with it. I don't know of any Robin movies he's planning, all I've ever read is that Rises was his final Batman movie. I guess it's possible, but I don't see why he would. Lastly, again it's not that I think his movies were really THAT bad, it's just the promise of what they could've been if he were just willing to let it be Batman. Just let go of having to box the character in the real world and just let it be what it is. There were glimpses of that throughout all of the movies and that he, in a way, held himself back from really going forward with it, that's what deeply disappoints me about his Batman movies.He could have made the definitive Batman movies.
