stanley wrote:There are some moments where you take a step back and say "it's just a movie." Nolan isn't infallible, and if you look hard enough at anything, you'll find inconsistencies. Movies are practically built on semi-illogical and coincidental things happening. If they weren't, they'd be boring to watch.

Remember all those times Batman just 'vanished' out of thin air. How did he do that? How about that time he suddenly popped up into the bank vault that Gordon was investigating in the Dark Knight? How the hell did he do that?

He's Batman. There's a certain mythical aspect about him that we just come to accept.

Pure and simple.

nolangoatdirector wrote:

Monicabbm wrote:After the beach scene, he cuts to john and then shows Batman looking for something on The Bat. This occurred while he was still on the beach? He is looking for the autopilot?

I don't think he was "looking for something on the Bat" or that he was looking for the autopilot. This still shot does make it look like he was looking down (for a button or a switch), but after watching this part again and again in 1080p, it's clear that he was looking up from right to left, and not down at a switch. Also, the autopilot controls would not be way off to the right; they would be in front of the pilot.

I think he jumped near the beach, would make more sense than jumping in the middle of water. The chances of him surviving is higher.

But people would have seen it if he ejected at the beach - there was an entire bus of orphans plus Blake watching him already, and the Bat was not too far away at that point because even after it flew way out over the water, Blake could still see it. And of course there's no way he ejected out over the water as he would have died from being too close to the explosion.

No, this was the view of the children on the bus and John Blake:





They had no vision of the beach.

Monicabbm wrote:

nolangoatdirector wrote: I don't think he was "looking for something on the Bat" or that he was looking for the autopilot. This still shot does make it look like he was looking down (for a button or a switch), but after watching this part again and again in 1080p, it's clear that he was looking up from right to left, and not down at a switch. Also, the autopilot controls would not be way off to the right; they would be in front of the pilot.


But people would have seen it if he ejected at the beach - there was an entire bus of orphans plus Blake watching him already, and the Bat was not too far away at that point because even after it flew way out over the water, Blake could still see it. And of course there's no way he ejected out over the water as he would have died from being too close to the explosion.

No, this was the view of the children on the bus and John Blake:





They had no vision of the beach.

But in these two pics there is no beach at all. So where did the beach come from? Is it a continuity error?

nolangoatdirector wrote:

Monicabbm wrote: No, this was the view of the children on the bus and John Blake:





They had no vision of the beach.

But in these two pics there is no beach at all. So where did the beach come from? Is it a continuity error?

That's what I'm trying to say. They didn't see the beach.

I don't think it's continuity error. It's just Batman away from the city. Maybe that is an island.
What intrigued me is that he's near the water this time.

first and foremost nolan is a god at filmaking. but he seriously botched the part with the bomb. i mean its hyper realistic but nolan always keeps things grounded at least in his batverse. like i said before with the shot by shot pics courtesy of monicabllm and the blast radius...i mean its so un nolanesque. there is no way he survived. but he shows bruce and selina at the end. she has the pearls and he has a nice battlescar to boot courtesy of bane. so he survived right? but nolan broke his rules and somethn just doesnt right about the way he handled his shots of bruce/batman in the bat and the nuke. basically it doesnt make sense for a nolan film.

It makes very straightforward sense. You could very, very easily say the same thing about half the stunts across the films, especially getting pulled out of a skyscraper holding onto a dude by a gigantic airplane.


-Vader

Vader182 wrote:It makes very straightforward sense. You could very, very easily say the same thing about half the stunts across the films, especially getting pulled out of a skyscraper holding onto a dude by a gigantic airplane.


-Vader

No, not "very straightforward sense". You yourself said earlier that you believe in the idea of Nolan playing with time and images during the Bat/bomb sequence which contradicts the word "straightforward". And the Fulton Skyhook is actually a real maneuver that has been done in real life. Anyway why do you always bring up "issues" from TDK to justify a problem in Rises?

nolangoatdirector wrote:

Vader182 wrote:It makes very straightforward sense. You could very, very easily say the same thing about half the stunts across the films, especially getting pulled out of a skyscraper holding onto a dude by a gigantic airplane.


-Vader

No, not "very straightforward sense". You yourself said earlier that you believe in the idea of Nolan playing with time and images during the Bat/bomb sequence which contradicts the word "straightforward". And the Fulton Skyhook is actually a real maneuver that has been done in real life. Anyway why do you always bring up "issues" from TDK to justify a problem in Rises?

I realize 'elements' of the Skyhook stuff was done in real life, but I'm pretty confident being ripped out of a skyscraper in a foreign power's airspace is well outside the boundaries of conventional believability. As I've stated ten thousand times, comparisons to Dark Knight (or Begins for that matter) are appropriate because everything we're talking about has to become a consistent point of thought across all the films. For instance, if gaps in the narrative upset you in one film, they ought to across the others. If an action beat that strains believability in one film is criticized but another generally as unbelievable in another film is adored, that's also a necessary thing to point out. That's how a film series functions. I'm not sure why I have to explain this at all, let alone so many times.

Anyway, it's very straightforward in the sense Batman has a massive arsenal fueled by virtually endless resources. All we know for sure is that at some point he activated the autopilot to continue flying it away while he made his escape. How he made that escape is ambiguous, which is fine. My point with skyhook is that from an outside trying to look in perspetive, that's arguably more ridiculous than finding an escape route. The final frames of Batman in the cockpit may very well be Bruce Wayne's thoughts and dreams extrapolated into images we have access to, watching "Batman" die, which in the film he does, so Bruce can live. It's also possible his escape was made over the water with some piece of future technology. It's straightforward because after seeing him accomplish a multitude of impossible feats with ease, this should be relatively easy to understand there's many ways of escape, regardless of the fact we aren't given any. If we were, it would've damaged everything Nolan set out to accomplish in the film. Moreover, it's a staple of some key Batman graphic novels and comics, which I won't name so I won't reveal spoilers, for Batman to have one 'final' twist that reveals he had a secret plan all along without an explanation for the final step. It's left to our imaginations, just like randomly appearing/disappearing, making him a mythic figure to us as much as the people of Gotham. To me, that's a powerful and all-encapsulating way to end the film.

-Vader

i think nolan wanted to give hope to both camps. that being he lived happilly ever after and fans who prefered him to make the sacrifice and give his life. i know im in the minority here but that uneasy feeling ive had since i saw it in theatres has not stopped knawing at me. i really think this end is open ended which is like most of his films and it was done intentionally because jonah nolan himself said that if fans are debating are movies then we did our job. which is sad cause i wanted it to have zero form of ambiguity in regards to bruce. i want to know he lived. the intention of this thread was to get the brightest people in here and pick it apart. and yes i have a lot of respect for this community. and it just put everyones theory down the drain. but at least we found out there is no answer. so there is my final 2 cents.

or its entirely possible that nolan and his team dont have an answer to how he escaped and as vader said before that part was intentionally for your imagination. thoughts?