Loading...
Christopher's 2005 reboot of the Batman franchise that tells the origins of how Bruce Wayne became Batman.

"I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you"

Posts: 1417
Location: Italy
I've been thinking a lot about this part of the film, because I can't really figure it out.
How do you interpret the end of BB?
The whole film revolves around the themes of justice, revenge and compassion. Doesn't Batman's decision contradict his words about compassion being important? I mean, after all, he does leave Ducard to die.
Does he simply turn Ducard's philosophy against him, in a "You made your choice, now face the consequences" kind of way?
What do you think?
Posts: 1618
Yeah... I didn't really know how to interprete this either... I thought it showed that Batman isn't all "good" there's a dark part to him too. So he will do his duty, and won't go against his own rules but he won't save someone who isn't worth saving to him. I think that part might be more explored in TDKR (hopefully) 8-)
Posts: 9042
Batman's rule is that he won't kill anyone, not that he has to save every single person in danger. He probably does not feel any responsibility for Ra's' current predicament, and therefore doesn't feel obligated to bail him out.

And just look at the chase scene where he sends cop cars flipping dangerously all over the road. He certainly wasn't trying to kill them, but someone easily could have died. Sometimes, he does questionable things in order to achieve his goals.

Or even look at his escape from the League of Shadows fortress. A couple dozen guys probably died during that.
Posts: 1417
Location: Italy
Thanks to both for your replies!
Hmmm, so you think it's related to the "dark" aspects of the character. I agree that Batman isn't a perfect, morally impeccable shining knight. He does do some questionable things in both films. I mean, even going to save Rachel and not Dent in TDK could be considered a "questionable" decision from a certain point of view. But that scene with Ducard has always left me perplexed. If compassion, in Bruce's own words, is "what separates us from our enemies", well, then he actually shows that he's not that different. :think:

Batcat wrote:I think that part might be more explored in TDKR (hopefully) 8-)

I hope so, too! :) Inception was basically a therapy session for Cobb, TDKR could be the same for Bruce. :lol:
Posts: 1168
Bruce saved Ra's' from the burning temple as well as the drop from the cliff. His efforts were later negated by Ra's' at Bruce's party. If you recall, Ra's' told Bruce he can't have compassion for anyone. Ra's' considered this a personal weakness in combating crime. So thinking about it, Bruce did what Ra's' told him to do and that was not to show compassion for anyone. At the same time, I don't think Ra's' would have wanted Bruce to save him. Because then, his philosophy on justice would have been null. When Ra's' closed his eyes, I believe he was accepting his own words of wisdom.

In retrospect, I don't think Bruce is evil for not saving Ra's'. I believe he was simply making a point by not saving him. If you don't have compassion for other people, how can expect any in return?
Posts: 15900
what i dont get is how Ras says that Bruce left him for dead in the mountains...he saved his life...what the hell?
Posts: 264
Lynn wrote:I've been thinking a lot about this part of the film, because I can't really figure it out.
How do you interpret the end of BB?
The whole film revolves around the themes of justice, revenge and compassion. Doesn't Batman's decision contradict his words about compassion being important? I mean, after all, he does leave Ducard to die.
Does he simply turn Ducard's philosophy against him, in a "You made your choice, now face the consequences" kind of way?
What do you think?


:think: as i recall batman did give Ra's a window of hope.. literally
he smashed open a window before his dramatic exit through the rear..

now that is justice :judge:
Posts: 1417
Location: Italy
Fran wrote:I don't think Ra's' would have wanted Bruce to save him. Because then, his philosophy on justice would have been null. When Ra's' closed his eyes, I believe he was accepting his own words of wisdom.

I totally agree about this. It's obvious that Ra's doesn't even try to save himself. He sticks to his own philosophy until the very end and he goes to his death with total acceptance. Love that scene.

As for Batman smashing the window, I don't think he did so to offer Ducard a way to escape... where could Ra's have gone from there? Batman threw the batarang out of the window to make a point that he wouldn't actively kill Ra's. But isn't leaving him there a bit like "Heh, I wash my hands of it, bye?" If Batman, as Fran said, really "did what Ra's told him to do and that was not to show compassion for anyone", doesn't this make him exactly like Ducard? Do you think this is the point the film is trying to make? Man, it's one complex scene.
Posts: 264
Lynn wrote:
Fran wrote:As for Batman smashing the window, I don't think he did so to offer Ducard a way to escape... where could Ra's have gone from there? Batman threw the batarang out of the window to make a point that he wouldn't actively kill Ra's. But isn't leaving him there a bit like "Heh, I wash my hands of it, bye?" If Batman, as Fran said, really "did what Ra's told him to do and that was not to show compassion for anyone", doesn't this make him exactly like Ducard? Do you think this is the point the film is trying to make? Man, it's one complex scene.


a lack of compassion would be to leave Ra's helpless (to his inevitable death)..
instead of following the agenda Ra's preaches him, Bruce shows compassion and does everything in his power to avoid becoming an executioner..

i know this is a late reply.. so sorry
Posts: 9042
Batman smashed the window to create a draft, which carries him out the back of the train.
Next page →
← Return to Batman Begins
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests.