Vader182 wrote:We just had a bit debate about this elsewhere.

But, not saving him is the same thing as murder, since his direct action (in this case lack of) resulted in the death of someone, especially because he's the one who has the train destroyed.

I agree. But I don't think it was unintentional on Nolan's part, especially because in Goyer's draft this scene was completely different and much more conventional:

Ra’s DIVES onto Batman- SMASHES him against the roof- the train LURCHES, SCRAPING against the concrete guiderails...
Batman ROLLS Ra’s onto the bottom- but Ra’s is CHOKING Batman, THUMBS PUSHED DEEP INTO THE FLESH ABOVE BATMAN’S NECKPIECE...

Batman STRUGGLES uselessly against Ra’s Al Ghul IRON GRIP...

RA’S AL GHUL
Are you afraid?!!

Ra’s looks up at Batman’s DYING eyes... Batman’s hands STOP PUSHING against Ra’s...

BATMAN
(choked)
Yes...

...and slip down his cloak to the activating pockets-

BATMAN (CONT’D)
...but not of you.

The cloak goes RIGID- CATCHES THE WIND- like pulling a rip cord- Batman YANKED from Ra’s Al Ghul’s hands, INTO THE
AIR...
Ra’s SCREAMS as he rides the train OFF THE MONORAIL...

Here Batman doesn't really make a conscious decision not to save Ra's. He just fights for his own life.

In the film, instead, Nolan deliberately draws the attention on Batman's choice not to act. I think that this may be part of Batman's nature as a "dark knight". Maybe that line is more about Batman's motives than the direct effect of his actions: he accepts to serve pure, blind justice and he lets go of both revenge and compassion (and that's what makes him such a tragic figure). "I won't kill you" = I won't administer punishment with my own hands." But I don't have to save you" = And neither mercy.

This of course is all conjecture, but, based on how Nolan seems to have wanted Batman to appear as a character within these films, having him become a hypocrite who secretly does kill people in sometimes near-direct ways seems a bit.. I dunno, 'off'.

This isn't addressed or apparent in The Dark Knight either, which overall has a much tighter script, and additionally, I find the element of Batman pushing himself to physically torture and psychologically shatter his opponents, and yet, somehow won't kill them when it seems to make the most sense just to end it all. Batman is, and always has been a gothic figure catalyzed from a strange manifestation of pure rage. Every side of Bruce/Batman is consistant with that except for him having huge logic holes in his own often-mentioned convictions. "Oh yeah, I'm totally going to kill the shit out of this guy but secretly, I'm not going to." Bruce would have to be an idiot to think that blowing up the fortress/directly killing Ra's isn't inconstant with his stern moral code (and it's shown to what extents he abides by said code when he won't kill The Joker in TDK, and Nolan definitely didn't write him as an idiot.

Thus, the only two options are that Nolan accidentally made him a huge idiot, or he accidentally has a few logic errors in the film. Not a big deal, but it's there.

-Vader

Batman kills Harvey at the end of TDK.

steveportee wrote:Batman kills Harvey at the end of TDK.

Captain Obvious strikes again!!!

Mr. Caine wrote:

steveportee wrote:Batman kills Harvey at the end of TDK.

Captain Obvious strikes again!!!

I'm simply pointing out that Batman is also directly responsible for someone's death in TDK, and it isn't just something that happens in Batman Begins.
But thanks for that very helpful response.

Well it is obvious isnt it? Batman says he doesnt kill and yet he killed bunch of ninjas and ra's at begins,and then he killed dent in the end of TDK

Mr. Caine wrote:Well it is obvious isnt it? Batman says he doesnt kill and yet he killed bunch of ninjas and ra's at begins,and then he killed dent in the end of TDK

Yes, it is obvious. I was just pointing that out to Vader, who was implying that Batman tried to save everyone in TDK. Well, he didn't do very good job of trying to save Harvey. He tackled him off the side of a freakin' building .

steveportee wrote:

Mr. Caine wrote:Well it is obvious isnt it? Batman says he doesnt kill and yet he killed bunch of ninjas and ra's at begins,and then he killed dent in the end of TDK

Yes, it is obvious. I was just pointing that out to Vader, who was implying that Batman tried to save everyone in TDK. Well, he didn't do very good job of trying to save Harvey. He tackled him off the side of a freakin' building .

it reminds me this thread:
http://www.nolanfans.com/forums/viewtop ... =14&t=5032

Oh God I remember that. You can't forget a topic like that.

Vader182 wrote: That is awful logic. That's like setting a house full of people on fire and saying you don't know they're going to die, so you're not really killing them.

-Vader

No because Ra's was the one who wanted to destroy Wayne's enterprise (and the city if I remember correctly but I have to do a re-watch ) with the train at the beginning, Batman didn't decide to kill Ra's by destroying a train or anything, he just said he didn't have to help him escape. Ra's is not like an innocent person who has no way of getting out of the situation (like the people in the house you're talking about) Ra's is full of ressources and ideas, so he could have had a way out.

That said, I never said that Batman's choice was the right one, I think it showed that he is human and has his dark side too that's why it wasn't a wrong writing decision.