@Unconforming - The problem is the other Barry is also played by Ezra, and you still have the whole third act the edit him out.

@Forthas - Starting a shared universe adapting The Dark Knight Returns, literally conceived to be the FINAL Batman story, is something that, almost 10 years later, I still cant understand.

@TheHumanSpider2 - Then do you understand Alien? Return of the Jedi? Top Gun? ... because it was not until after those films successes were their sequels even contemplated. All of those films were made as final films for their respective franchises.

@Forthas - There's a HUGE difference. Ever since Batman Begins there was an ongoing theme of how long Bruce would put up this fight. Alfred was constantly mentioning how Bruce couldn't do this his entire life. Bruce's own plan was to quit and settle down with Rachel until she died. And he only retired at the end of Dark Knight because he HAD to.

All of that is why him retiring at the end of TDKR matters. He found a "replacement" (for lack of a better word) for Rachel with Selina, and he followed through with his plan to live the rest of his life happily and away from a war on crime. He found peace. That's why it's meaningful.

Tony Stark coming out of retirement was because he was the only guy that could figure out time travel and help fix the entire universe and get all of the dusted people back. Those stakes are plenty high enough for anyone to come out of retirement.

@IronSpider101 - Yeah it was a broad stroke Batman. But thats something I really didn't like about Nolan's movies. Bruce becomes Batman in Begins. Let's say that story takes place over a month once he becomes Batman, which I think is pushing it, but I'll give it the benefit of the doubt. Then TDK happens right after Begins, and we know this because Alfred gave Batman the Joker card. So we know Joker was active during the events of Begins.

So again, benefit of the doubt, let's just say from the time Begins ended, and The Dark Knight Ended, a year passed. Which again, feels like way too long. But I'll give it that.

Then he's out of action for 8 years. Then Rises starts, he becomes Batman again and within a short amount of time he gets his back broken and thrown into the prison for a few months. Then he comes back wins the day, and retires.

So in the entire series, he was only actively Batman for 2 years, at the absolute most. And that's pushing it quite a bit. It's probably closer to about a year, year and a half.

@CorndogBurglar - The entire theme of the character is that he CAN"T stop being Batman. If he un-retired again it would reinforce that idea which comes from the comics. Also, at no point does Batman SAY he is retiring and the events of Man of Steel (which is why it is such a great pairing) is the kind of event that would bring someone like Batman back to deal with the consequences of a first contact event.

The fact that he has someone who could be Nightwing is not so much to replace him but to franchise what he does so he does not need to be everywhere at once...also from the comics. The end of Dark Knight Rises leaves Bruce right where he started...he left his money to Alfred, was living abroad, and was believed to be dead. The same way he started being Batman he could resume it. WB should have no problem with this, a 70 year old Keaton was just brought back to be Batman again.

It is the perfect complement to Man of Steel, because both heroes are presented in the same way - both are nonlinear origin stories, both scored by Hans Zimmer, and as I mentioned earlier, the end is the exact kind of dramatic event to bring Bruce back.

I was not talking about coming out of retirement in Endgame, I was talking about the events between Iron Man 3 when he ended the film blowing up all of his armor and the beginning of Age of Ultron where the issue was never even addressed.

@TheHumanSpider2 - at least Cumberbatch is not a wanted criminal so...one point for MOM I guess :p

@TheHumanSpider2 - who knew tomato cans could be so important.

@GhostDog - Henry cavill deserved better