The Dark Knight {Spoilers Abound}

I actually think Joker should come back, but not for a while. Because his effects on Gotham's mind will be really interesting to explore.

But Joker is something more than the normal villain. He's the arch-nemesis and no one can push Batman like Joker can. And like Blofeld in the Bond movies, he shouldn't be tied down to one actor. Heath did amazing, but he laid the ground work and put up the challenge for next actor. But the show must go on.

Later. Batman 3 shouldn't have the Joker. But I have to see an unstoppable force meeting an immovable object again.

Apparently the Joker is going to sorta appear in Supermax

his name appears on a prison cell door, as an easter egg


Did that ever go past the writing stage? I like the idea.
 
Last edited:
And if Dent's alive, you kill the bittersweet irony of the situation. It's not that Batman broke his rule, because technically he didn't. He killed Dent in the process of saving an innocent life. The twist on the situation is that the Joker, who threatened hundreds (maybe thousands) of lives and manipulated both Batman and Dent into the situation is still alive. Batman had to kill Dent. It was the only way to save Gordon's son in such a tight situation. He wasn't killing out of anger. He was killing out of necessity. But the Joker put himself in a situation where if Batman killed him, it would necessarily be an act of wrath or spite. If Dent's alive, it kills the irony, and it decreases the impact of the situation, because the nature of Dent's death makes Batman complicit in the death of his own salvation (and the salvation of Gotham). By tricking Batman into chasing Dent instead of Rachel, the Joker forces Bruce Wayne to burn all of his bridges, leaving only the Batman. Then he turns and forces Batman into a situation where he is forced to murder the last hope for Gotham, and the last hope for a world where Wayne can live without Batman. And the coup de grace is that he'll have to take the blame for Dent's indiscretions.

hadn't thought about it like that. well put.
 
I hate when people say "his story is told." Yes, one of his stories is told. There are other stories. If a character is limited to one story that can be told, it's a pretty ****ty character.
 
I have yet to read the previous 23 pages.

But anyhoo:

I saw THE DARK KNIGHT yesterday.

I did not like the first one. I did not like BATMAN BEGINS. It was okay, but boring.

But my God - THE DARK KNIGHT is to superheroes was THE WRATH OF KHAN is to STAR TREK.

It is a sequel to a heavily bloated franchise that is GOOD. Properly good. It works on its own without any help, and yet, keeps all the important things of the original.

The problem with the recent slew of superhero movies (the previous exceptions being the first Superman and Batman movies) is that they are boring.

Nothing exciting happens in them. Sure, they have kinesis and spectacle and are visually exciting - but they're bloated dull biopics of a bloated dull franchise, and nothing really exiting happens.

SPIDER-MAN - he saves Mary Jane. The death of Gwen Stacy is what it is because she dies. Kill of MJ. No one would know what happened next. Green Goblin dies - the villain dies by his own hand. I've seen that happen before to better villains. SUPERMAN RETURNS, IRON MAN, THE HULK and THE INCREDIBLE HULK... all set ups for a future franchise.

Now, don't get me wrong. I LIKED IRON MAN, and both Hulk movies and even SUPERMAN RETURNS. I enjoyed them. Spidey too. But they all lacked that fundamental immersive element - the surprise of "how will this turn out?"

We know Spidey and MJ will be fine and the villain will disappear forever because the franchise requires that. Iron Man is a fantastic TV pilot - but I know where it's going before I sit down.

BATMAN BEGINS was a particularly big culprit - a good film but so terribly predictable.

The worst culprit I think is the X-MEN films - the first one 'sets up' everything and the second one 'sets some more stuff up' to the point that nothing has happened in either films with the exception of Jean Grey "dying" at the end (and we knew she's not dead). Then X-MEN 3 came out. And for some reason, they decided to actually make an exciting movie. It wasn't great and it had some REAL stupidity to it, but hell, it was a roller coaster. I had no idea what they'd do next - and what they did was kill off most the team. I was totally unable to turn away.

Then... there's THE DARK KNIGHT.

I have the trailers memorised. I know so much about the film. Yet I totally forgot I had seen pictures and clips of scenes with Jim Gordon in that I had yet to see on the film - I forgot so utterly that I thought Gordon was dead.

Everyone did. I thought they killed Gordon off.

Then they kill off Rachel... BRILLIANTLY.

The film was off the ****ing chain. Joker did what they said he did - he walked on and just turned over every table he could. He was just this terrible force of chaos and it was wonderful.

The commissioner, the judge, Rachel, the mob bosses - they all die brilliantly. So much so that I thought the Mayor would die. That Alfred might buy it. That Lucius is a goner. That Reese or Montoya or the guy who played Holtz in ANGEL might die. So much that I thought Gordon WAS dead.

And I loved every ****ing minute.

Two-Face was so expertly handled and the CGI was brilliant.

Gagh. I loved it. So many wonderful touches. The sky hook. Joker's "You can't kill me because of some bizarre moral code and I can't kill you because your TOO MUCH FUN." The fake Batmen and the fate of one of them (everyone jumped out of their seats when he hit the window). Dent's courtroom assassination attempt where he beats the crap out of a mafia hitman and CONTINUES WITH THE ****ING CASE. Joker's continuous changing of his 'origin'. The ending - there was nary of a hint of it in the trailers! The two boats with the detonators and the criminal THROWS THE DETONATOR AWAY. A movie with A-list talent all over the shop and they give a key emotional scene to a guy named Tiny Lister! WOW. I loved Joker's reaction when, after breaking Harvey, he puts the gun to his head and Harvey pulls out the coin. Joker's PROUD and IMPRESSED of Harvey. And HARVEY LETS HIM GO.

Something else I love - Batman's theme in the movie is two ****ing notes. That's it. TWO NOTES.

So what's Joker's?

WHITE NOISE. Just one static note that varies in pitch. And every time you heard it you shat your pants.

So - yes. ******* it was amazing.

Some people say it was too long - but what would you cut? When was the editing poor? Maybe upon another viewing I'll see something that could go...

And - here's the thing, I'm going to see it again. If only because I want to see if it will hold up now that the suspense is gone. I'm curious.

But two things - firstly; the fate of Two-Face. Part of me feels it's a little lackluster... A LITTLE. I'm not sure. I like it, there's nothing wrong with it, but it's just... you end with your best. It's not the best scene in the movie. That's all.

Secondly - Bale's Batman voice is still awful. I get he's overdoing it so no one recognises his voice but it sounds stupid when he's trying to be profound. When he's intimidating people by going, "Let her go!" or demanding to find out where the Joker is ("The fall won't kill me." "I'm counting on it.") - it's fine. It short small commanding bursts. But when he tries to go, "If you live long enough to be the villain..." he sounds retarded.

That's it. That's all I could find wrong with the film. I don't know how they got Joker to be so scary and so funny at the same time. How Dent was so empathetic. Aaaagh. It's just all so good.

The only part where I felt sad for Ledger is when he says "We'll be doing this forever".

And you know what? I don't want a third Batman movie. For some reason, BEGINS did very well and Nolan STILL thought "I'll only do a sequel if it's better" and pulled it off. When was the last time a sequel was so unarguably better than the original? That's right - THE WRATH OF KHAN. And both were the results of the director taking the best bits from several 'next in the franchise' pitches.

If Nolan thinks he can really do a terrific third film, good for him. But I'm happy with how it ended. I love that things have CHANGED at the end. He's gone from unofficial saviour to a hated outcast that'll still save them. There's a proper change. The villain loses but isn't killed, and Two-Face is truly tragic. And the girlfriend not only dumps him but gets killed. It's brilliant, no-holds barred. The thing is - there's not much more a villain can DO to Batman anymore. Joker kinda took him to pieces.

So I don't want a third film. I don't want a PHANTOM MENACE or KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL ruining this. Dear God, I don't want BATMAN AND ROBIN to come back.

Awesome movie.
 
I have the trailers memorised. I know so much about the film. Yet I totally forgot I had seen pictures and clips of scenes with Jim Gordon in that I had yet to see on the film - I forgot so utterly that I thought Gordon was dead.

Everyone did. I thought they killed Gordon off.

I thought Gordon had died, but I remembered seeing promotional photos and bits of the trailers where Gordon sort of had a grayish tint to his hair (it might have been light shining on him, but I thought it was a cool nod to the comics where Gordon has almost always had gray hair), when he had the vest he was wearing when he brought down the Joker after the big chase sequence.
 
For me I remembered the shot with Gordon breaking the Bat-Signal, so I was pretty sure he was going to make it.
 
Don't even compare Gordon's fake death with Dent's real one. There's no basis for comparison between the two whatsoever. Gordon's fake death made sense within the movie, especially in terms of character motivation (he was trying to protect his family). Dent's death made sense for the character: he was a tragic character who deserved a tragic death. Dent's story was told: he was the uncorruptable white knight who was corrupted and brought down. Then he died. THE END.

Seriously, why re-hash villains that've already appeared fully fleshed out and done incredibly well in existing movies (the first two Nolan Batmans), instead of introducing new villains in the same fashion? Batman has a huge rogues gallery, many of which are deserving of appearing in a future Batman. I'd prefer new characters, thank you. A Scarecrow like cameo is fine (but not for Dent because he's DEAD).

Gordon's death didn't make sense. REALISTICALLY (which is what these movies are all about) there is no way that he could pretended being dead for as long as he was. What was the point of it really? You say to save his family, but I must have missed that while I was watching it. Is it so that the Joker doesn't target him and kill his family? If so he thought of that pretty quickly while knocking the mayor to the side of the Joker bullet. To me at least it felt gimmicky and a bit pointless. Did anyone actually think that he was dead? I mean it's Commissioner Gordon, not to mention that there were still a handful of scenes from the trailer with him that weren't in the movie at that point.

I don't know how you can say that Dent is 100% dead based upon the fall he took when Maroni is thrown off of a building (roughly the same height) on to concrete nonetheless, seemingly snaps both legs, and then is later seen walking with only the help of a cane.

I hate when people say "his story is told." Yes, one of his stories is told. There are other stories. If a character is limited to one story that can be told, it's a pretty ****ty character.

Thank You!
 
I hate when people say "his story is told." Yes, one of his stories is told. There are other stories. If a character is limited to one story that can be told, it's a pretty ****ty character.

Utter nonsense.

Phil Connors from GROUNDHOG DAY
Warren Schmidt from ABOUT SCHMIDT
Ric Blaine from CASABLANCA
Detectives Mills and Somerset from SEVEN
Paul Sheldon from MISERY
Salieri from AMADEUS
Nick Angel from HOT FUZZ
Hamlet, MacBeth and every other damn character Shakespeare ever invented.

You want a third Batman with Two-Face or Joker or whatever? That's cool. I think "the story's told" you might think there are more stories. That's cool.

But a character is not ****ty just because he can't be franchised.
 
I just took my 6 year old brother to watch TDK.

He walked out of the film, looked up at me and said "That was the most awesomist film I have ever seen..." and proceeded to tell me his favourite bit was when they revealed the burnt face of Two Face for the first time, and he wants to see it again.

EDIT: He has also taken to wandering round flipping a coin....
 
Last edited:
Now it would be tricky to bring Two-Face back just because sometimes a villain doesn't need to be brought back. If you look at other comic movies some benefit from having the villain return and some are hurt by it. In the case of the villain returning being good is like in X-Men and Spider-Man. Magneto and Norman Osborn ****ing made those movies and were by far the most interesting characters in the bunch (maybe besides Wolverine in the X-Men films) This is because these are characters that have so many stories that need to be told. But if you take characters like Lex Luthor and Dr. Doom, they were villains that had absolutley no reason to come back for the sequels of their films just because they didn't have stories that needed to be told. Harvey Dent's a tough character to bring back just for the fact that he doesn't have to many stories to be told other than Gotham's hero gets horribly scarred and is replaced by Two-Face. I just don't think Two-Face needs to come back which is why he should stay buried. Batman has at least twelve villains who all deserve a spotlight in a movie, four of them have had their moment in the sun (or moonlight if you will) and some of the others should just get their shot at it. But that's my two cents.
 
Gordon's death didn't make sense. REALISTICALLY (which is what these movies are all about) there is no way that he could pretended being dead for as long as he was. What was the point of it really? You say to save his family, but I must have missed that while I was watching it. Is it so that the Joker doesn't target him and kill his family? If so he thought of that pretty quickly while knocking the mayor to the side of the Joker bullet. To me at least it felt gimmicky and a bit pointless. Did anyone actually think that he was dead? I mean it's Commissioner Gordon, not to mention that there were still a handful of scenes from the trailer with him that weren't in the movie at that point.

I thought he might be dead, probably because I didn't comb through all the trailers before I saw the movie. And it doesn't seem like it realistically couldn't be done. Gotham was basically in a state of emergency by the time his "death" happened. It seems entirely feasible to me.

And I'll get to Bass' comments (which are mostly right) later.
 
Bottom Line: If this is true, if Dent is really dead, it was a TERRIBLE way to do it in the movie.... a fall from what looked like a not-too-high height that another character walked away from without injury in a movie where they'd done a scene SPECIFICALLY STRESSING the survivability of falls from not-too-high heights. It's too wishy-washy to be the death that character needed, so I saw a) it's not good enough, he can be their dark secret somewhere and die again someday, and b) fortunately, there's enough story left in the character for them to keep him alive long enough to do that.

This of course completely ignores the very viable facts that Dent had just left the hospital with VERY serious 3rd degree burns over half his head, and wasn't wearing armor like Batman was. The velocity of his fall was much faster also, since he fell with the intertia of Batman's push off the edge, whereas Batman held on and only fell the distance without the extra interia. Dent could've landed badly on his neck and broken it, thus dying. Batman got lucky, etc.

It also ignores the obvious assumption Dent's body would've been processed and pronounced dead, then cremated or buried. The pronouncement of death surely happens before the memorial for Dent Gordon is giving at the end. THAT scene alone confirms for me Dent won't return. Speaing of wishy-washy...Dent suddenly popping up alive is campy and stupid in respect to the realism Nolan injected into these movies.

And all these things are semantics anyway. Dent's dead.

The thing is......There's only so much the human body can take.

Agreed. On one hand....take the blame for Dent's indiscretions.

They said it better anyway.

Stop retconning your "timeline powers" to whatever you want. Who do you think are, Loeb?

If you continue to compare me to and insinuate I hang out with Jeph Loeb, sir, I'll be forced to put a sugar/flour mixture in your gas tank.

For me I remembered the shot with Gordon breaking the Bat-Signal, so I was pretty sure he was going to make it.

I remembered the scene from the trailer with Gordon explaining all the knives and lint in Joker's pockets. I ended up thinking..."Did it get cut...No, they wouldn't cut that...would they?" I was convinced enough he might be dead even though I had evidence otherwise. Damn good job.

DARKKNIGHT said:
Gordon's death didn't make sense. REALISTICALLY (which is what these movies are all about) there is no way that he could pretended being dead for as long as he was. What was the point of it really? You say to save his family, but I must have missed that while I was watching it.

Watch it again. Gordon goes home after its revealed he's alive and his wife flips out. He explains he did it to protect them.

Is it so that the Joker doesn't target him and kill his family? If so he thought of that pretty quickly while knocking the mayor to the side of the Joker bullet.

No, Gordon obviously wasn't worried about himself, he was worried about his family, hence why he threw himself in the way of the bullet (he was obviously wearing a vest anyway), and at the end when he pleaded with Harvey to kill him, not his son or family. The point was hammered home continuously in the movie, not sure how you missed it.

I recommend you watch it again.

To me at least it felt gimmicky and a bit pointless. Did anyone actually think that he was dead? I mean it's Commissioner Gordon, not to mention that there were still a handful of scenes from the trailer with him that weren't in the movie at that point.

Actually, yes, MOST people thought he was dead. Have you not been reading people's posts in this thread? And read above. I mention my thoughts on Gordon's "death" in relation to what I saw in the trailer.

I don't know how you can say that Dent is 100% dead based upon the fall he took when Maroni is thrown off of a building (roughly the same height) on to concrete nonetheless, seemingly snaps both legs, and then is later seen walking with only the help of a cane.

I can't say he's 100% dead. I just think he's 100% dead. Its only my opinion.
 
This of course completely ignores the very viable facts that Dent had just left the hospital with VERY serious 3rd degree burns over half his head, and wasn't wearing armor like Batman was. The velocity of his fall was much faster also, since he fell with the intertia of Batman's push off the edge, whereas Batman held on and only fell the distance without the extra interia. Dent could've landed badly on his neck and broken it, thus dying. Batman got lucky, etc.

It also ignores the obvious assumption Dent's body would've been processed and pronounced dead, then cremated or buried. The pronouncement of death surely happens before the memorial for Dent Gordon is giving at the end. THAT scene alone confirms for me Dent won't return. Speaing of wishy-washy...Dent suddenly popping up alive is campy and stupid in respect to the realism Nolan injected into these movies.

And all these things are semantics anyway. Dent's dead.
You're just guessing as we all are. So it really can't be "obvious" if it wasn't shown to us. :wink:


If you continue to compare me to and insinuate I hang out with Jeph Loeb, sir, I'll be forced to put a sugar/flour mixture in your gas tank.
Don't make me use my mod powers! :p


I can't say he's 100% dead. I just think he's 100% dead. Its only my opinion.
Eggzakery!
 
Dent could've landed badly on his neck and broken it, thus dying. Batman got lucky, etc

Or he could have just as likely landed on his *** or back and ended up relatively fine.

Watch it again. Gordon goes home after its revealed he's alive and his wife flips out. He explains he did it to protect them.

I know he says that he does it to protect his family, but do they ever specify what he is protecting them from? It would be a help if you could explain how Gordon pretending to be dead helps his family.

I can't say he's 100% dead. I just think he's 100% dead. Its only my opinion.

Well ok then. All I am saying is that I think it is possible that he isn't dead.
 
Just a quick thing - When Batman has to choose between Rachel and Harvey; does he pick Harvey or did Joker LIE to him and switch where Rachel and Harvey were because he knew that Bats would go after Rachel?

I just took my 6 year old brother to watch TDK.

He walked out of the film, looked up at me and said "That was the most awesomist film I have ever seen..." and proceeded to tell me his favourite bit was when they revealed the burnt face of Two Face for the first time, and he wants to see it again.

EDIT: He has also taken to wandering round flipping a coin....

I've taken to going "haha ha haa haha haa haaa haa haa oh ahee ahee - a ha - ha ooh hee ha".

Your 6 year old brother is super cool.

White noise Bass? South Park calls that the brown noise.

Oh, you're so silly Hibiki.
 
Last edited:
Just a quick thing - When Batman has to choose between Rachel and Harvey; does he pick Harvey or did Joker LIE to him and switch where Rachel and Harvey were because he knew that Bats would go after Rachel?
He chose Rachel. Joker said Harvey was at 2050 (or whatever the address was). And Gordon said "We're going after Harvey!".
 

Latest posts

Back
Top