Miranda Tate (SPOILERS)

[The Joker]

He was pretty lackluster compared to the comic book counterpart, but since it was never meant to be more than a small part (rather than a main villain), it hasn't bothered me.  They needed a character on trial to show that Crane was getting people off to Arkham and it was only natural for that character to be seen again when the League breaks open the asylum and for Zsasz to go after Rachel in revenge in the Narrows.  It wasn't a great version of Zsasz, but judging Begins's narrative apart from the source material, he served his purpose in the story well enough for me.  In Miranda/Talia's case, I expected much more from one of the main villains.

I suppose the reason why the Zsasz character being so lackluster is extremely disappointing to me is that I know that character could have been done better. Even if we're talking about a small part here. Take for example, the Scarecrow. His appearance in TDK was a nice, and neat little scene that was satisfying to watch play out. It was pretty brief, but it got the job done. I would also theorize that even IF the Scarecrow had made no appearance in BB, but rather TDK, and had that scene played out exactly the same, it STILL would have been a satisfying appearance for that character. As, much like in Begins, you get the idea on what the character is all about.

With Zsasz, we get none of that. He's essentially a thug that happens to have the same name as a villain in the comic books.

I'll give the Miranda twist one thing- it was actually a twist.  Having a seemingly innocent Wayne Enterprises exec turn out to be Ra's al Ghul's daughter and the leader of a terrorist organization is a much bigger twist than having a second-in-command disciple of the League of Shadows turn out to have be the actual leader of the League of Shadows.  If you miss the dialogue when Neeson returns onscreen, you'd think that Ducard just got promoted.

I personally thought the Ra's twist worked better, though, because of how well they established the Ducard-Bruce mentor relationship earlier on, so I could see the impact on Bruce in discovering he has to battle the man who trained him and the final battle was appropriately filled with references to the lessons Ra's taught him as they went head to head in the monorail.

I didn't feel the same betrayal for Bruce in this movie because I didn't buy the Miranda-Bruce relationship or his feelings for her in the first place.  There was the opportunity for some inner conflict/drama in Bruce having to take down the woman he loved, but they didn't go for it and the final battle amounted to all the Batvehicles of the Nolan franchise firing at each other.

I can see your point of view. In the narrative, the Ducard/Ra's ruse works better than the whole Miranda/Talia ruse. However, I felt the execution of both wasn't especially surprising. As a movie buff, you pretty much expected Liam/Ducard/Ra's to return at some point near the climax of BB, just like how many waited for Miranda to reveal who she truly was in TDKR. The narrative works better in BB, but I felt the twist of Bane's assumed backstory actually being that of Talia's worked better from a audience perspective. It's just that either one can't be described as anything like a home run.

I agree about Talia's resentment towards Bruce.  In fact, I completely understand the first half where they want revenge on Batman for killing Ra's, so they bankrupt him and Bane breaks him.

But once Bane gets into discussion about finishing Ra's al Ghul's plan, it lost me.  How do Bane and Talia view Ra's al Ghul's legacy?  What do they believe in?  From the film, I gathered it was blowing up Gotham, but if they didn't care about the reasons why Ra's was trying to destroy the city in the first place and just want Gotham to explode, that's a pretty weak motivation for me.  It makes it seem like Bane and Talia planned and waited more than eight years from Ra's's death to essentially nuke themselves in a city that neither of them had much of a reason to hate, just in the name of "Ra's al Ghul's legacy."

Talia's plan to blow up Gotham, in my opinion, was much more less grand than what Ra's had planned in Begins. Ra's plan was to have Gotham rip itself apart thru fear, and establish order as, if we are to go on by the speech Ra's gives Bruce, the League have been keeping the world in check for centuries. Talia's was more centered on her father's legacy, and in that, comes across as much more irrational than that of her father. I also believe that Talia and Bane wanted to prove that Gotham hadn't changed for the better, despite all the low crime statistics, it was still as bad as it was before, given the right prodding. And, Bane wanted to make Batman, the man who beat Ra's, suffer as much as possible. Perhaps for Talia, and perhaps for himself as well. As it's evident Bane is no angel himself.

If anything, I think Nolan should be regarded as worse than Burton simply because Burton's Batman never vowed against killing.  The fact that he killed didn't contradict anything that Burton's Batman said or promised beforehand.

In Nolan's case, Batman did refuse to kill and yet, he had a direct role in the temple fire that killed the decoy Ra's and several League of Shadows members, deliberately left the real Ra's al Ghul to die on the train, tackled Two-Face off of a building to his death, and, in this movie, shot at Talia's truck, causing it to crash and kill her.  At no point was it ever explored that Batman broke his "one rule" or betrayed his own beliefs in doing these things.  It would've been far more interesting if these movies did.

In fact, the only instance of Bruce feeling shame was in the beginning of Batman Begins when he throws the gun in the river (which, ironically, was when he didn't have anything to do with Joe Chill's death).

Nolan's Batman essentially starts out vowing against guns...then ends the trilogy by shooting down the main villain's truck.

Agreed. Seeing as how things have played out over this trilogy, making a story point in the vow seems contradictory in the actions that later transpire, or in the temple's case, soonafter transpires.

That's the best explanation I've heard so far. But it doesn't gel with the Bane from the comics. Agents of the League of Assassins have often been shown to sacrifice themselves when commanded to do so. But Bane would never be so subservient. He would never display that level of obedience to anyone, not even for love. He was romantically attached to Talia in the comics at one point. And he treated her as though she were a trophy to be won by conquest.

Just to reiterate, I really do like Hardy's Bane. At first I was a doubter, but after seeing the movie I changed my mind. I thought he was terrific in the role. I just wish they hadn't undermined his characterisation with that last plot twist. I guess I'm just going to have to accept that the movie Bane and the comic version are two different beasts. I don't usually have a problem with changes to the source material, provided they function within the context of the movie. What I find so frustrating here though is that Bane was faithful to the comics, right up until his last scene. Then they ruined it. And all for a plot twist which, in my opinion, was detrimental to the film anyway.

All valid points. I admit, I really enjoyed the film as a whole, but much like previous Batman films, it does have it's problems and it's easily understandable the issues a fan would have of how Bane is portrayed in the comics, vs how he was portrayed in TDKR. I agree Hardy did a fine job with what he had to work with, and is probably my favorite Bane that has made a appearance outside the comics media. However, it is the TDKR Bane and I just take that version of the character for what it is. Which is a strong, intelligent, monstrous character, who has apparently a much stronger bond with Talia, and that has perhaps a more sympathetic past (protector/disfigurement) than that of his comic book counterpart. Which is very harrowing in it's own right.

[bttfbat]

So did they just pull the Tate's character from this rumored role of Harley Quinn??   This sounds a bit farmilar to what we got...  Batman enemy who was killed comes back in a vision.  Secret daughter out for revenge..   Anyway I just read this and thought of the connection and how similar of an idea we got in the last Nolan film: "The fifth entry in the Batman franchise would have been entitled 'Batman Triumphant', and the script, written by future I Am Legend writer Mark Potosevich, featured the villainous Scarecrow (set to be portrayed by Nicolas Cage) terrorising Gotham. There would also be a subplot involving Harley Quinn (rumoured as a part for Madonna) who was depicted as the Joker's daughter – out for revenge on Batman after his murder of her father in Tim Burton's first film. Jack Nicholson expressed enthusiasm in returning to his role as The Joker in a fear gas-induced dream sequence, where Batman would have to face his parents' killer yet again." - http://whatculture.com/film/before-the-dark-knight-rises-10-batman-films-that-never-were.php

[BatmAngelus]

That's a good point, bttfbat.  While I definitely remember rumors of Harley Quinn being a villain for Batman 5, with Joker returning in hallucinations, I'm not sure if those aspects were ever confirmed to be part of the Protosevich script or that Harley would be Joker's daughter.  Still, it does seem like similar ideas were brought to life in this film.

What's interesting is that Talia's usually around in stories with her father, Ra's, and Harley's usually in stories with the Joker.  Since both Nicholson's Joker and Ra's were killed in previous movies, Talia and Harley would've been relegated to "new character with never-previously-mentioned connection to the super villain of a past movie who is now out for revenge" status.

I'm curious what would've happened if Miranda Tate was revealed to be Ra's al Ghul's other daughter, Nyssa, instead of Talia.  Similarities between Miranda and Nyssa include:
- Nyssa has used the Lazarus Pit and was imprisoned years ago with her family, though in a concentration camp in WWII.  Since the film already combined the Lazarus Pit ideas, this would've been a natural fit and stayed true to Nyssa's origins more than Talia's.
- Had taken over the League of Assassins after Ra's al Ghul's death, too.
- Had no love/feelings toward Batman and only saw him as an enemy.

Of course, none of this changes the fact that the character was still woefully underdeveloped in the movie, but in some ways, I think Miranda may be closer to Nyssa than to Talia.  Plus, if they revealed she was Nyssa, it'd have given fans a bit more of a surprise, after months and months of speculating that Miranda was Talia.