Quote Originally Posted by Chubistian View Post
I think Bruce in the DK Trilogy has a much different approach that most of his counterparts in comics. In Christopher Nolan's movies I always got the idea that Bruce wasn't as obsesive with his alter ego as he's in other versions. He could stop being Batman and he didn't think Batman was essential as a constant hero in the city (he thought with his dissapearance in DK Gotham would be better) at least until DK Rises. He finally past on the mantle when he found something better to live for. This doesn't mean that there aren't shapes of obsesion with this version of Bruce, just not as strong as other versions of Batman.

I think it's interesting that, even when Tom King loves Frank Miller's Batman, King's version evolves to admit that he CHOOSES to be Batman, and that his happiness doesn't meddle with his crusade as a hero, while Bruce in the DK Universe ends up consumed by his alter ego, finding only wholeness in the cowl.
It's interesting. The big difference with the Nolanverse, besides it being significantly more grounded and contained, is Bruce sees his crusade as winnable, whereas most other versions he is pretty clear that it's a very abstract goal. It comes down to how the supervillains are justified. In the Nolanverse, there aren't really supervillains outside of the League and the Joker, nor are there other superheroes; of course in most other versions, Batman is just one of many costumed people.

So I don't know if the obsession is different, but the way it manifests is different. I think "obsessive" is one of the universal traits depicted in every version of Batman, even 60s TV Batman. In TDKRises, Bruce not being Batman is corrosive to his soul, similar to DKReturns. It's his obsessive destructive qualities turned inward instead of outward.

I think it's the nature of Bane's character to invite the story question of Batman's ending. Or the other way around — thinking of a "last Batman story" would seem to invite an omega character like Bane.

Anyway it's just interesting the way that different writers have approached the question of "Can Batman be happy and be Batman?" with different answers, but I think only Tom King's version answers "yes."