The Dark Knight Rises ***USE SPOILER TAGS***

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm gonna start watching movies the way Wofford does. Plug my ears, shut my eyes, yell "LA-LA-LA!" until the final scene and then start paying attention. Because, apparently, the previous 2hrs of a film don't mean ____. It's all about the epilogue! :yess: :lol

All out of non points so you turn to your comfort zone.:yess:
 
This isn't the comics and I've read some great stories even in those without the Joker.

not only does it not fit with the character's mythos for longer then you and I have been around combined, but even with the character that Nolan himself created for TDK. I don't believe that Heath's Joker would sit quietly by for a decade.

:lecture :wave Nolan instilled that same sense that one would need the other and be doing it forever.
 
Last edited:
This is what makes me think this movie isn't gonna be worth the hype. You have to tie everything title together and distancing yourself seems stupid IMO. Don't be afraid of your previous work and build off of it totally. I mean you're using basically the same movie title. In other words people are going to be thinking about it man up and go for it.

Just because the Joker isn't in it in some way?! That's pretty damn absurd.

The film will tie the trilogy together so you don't have to worry about that.
 
Last edited:

Maybe he's not? Maybe he's tried and there's just nothing he can do. There are literally a billion different things you could come up with but it all comes back to the point that he doesn't add to any story arc in TDKR so it doesn't matter either way. It's complete fanfare to mention him. That's all.
 
And calling the movie The Dark Knight Rises? Scarecrows little scene in TDK? Making that guy named Victor Zsasz instead of a random inmate? Fanfare.
 
Last edited:
Burton created and killed the Joker in a single movie and they continued with films after that, so is that any less ignoring the role of Joker in Batman's life?

These are movies, not comic books or TV series. Good film stories wrap up character arcs, they don't leave open ends like a TV series or comic book might, they don't have the luxury, they're short, usually 3 part stories if they're planned to be multiple films.

I don't see any filmmaker doing Batman movies that include the Joker and then bring him back in sequels even in discussion to make implication that he's out there, still a threat. Movies treat Batman as having immediate threats in front of him, they never act as if there's an ongoing threat that he'll deal with again some day.
 
Nolan wasnt going to recast. He became friends with Health, and la de daa all that jazz.

Just deal with it for one movie series. Next one will do it right.
 
All out of non points so you turn to your comfort zone.:yess:

I'm not out of points. Other than being obstinate (as usual), you don't have one. The whole of TDK sets up Joker to appear in it's sequel, up to and including the dialogue when Batman faces off against him, which, according to the Nolancompoops, is meticulously and thoroughly thought through and every word placed in the script with intent and meaning. TDK set up Joker as the main antagonist for it's sequel. You're blatantly ignoring that and pulling the a-typical apologist bit, pretending like it never happened because it doesn't suit your argument. Adam Savage much?

i-reject-your-reality.jpg
 
Meh. I was disappointed like I said when I read Joker will not be mentioned in this.

Looking at the new spots again, i'm already over it :dunno

Like SnakeDoctor said - if the film ends with Batman dying or retiring for good, then, and only then, would the 'we're destined to do this forever' line be lessened. If the film lives up to its hype, it will only be a minor annoyance for me.
 
Absolutely. Non of it added to the storyline and the films would have been the same without them.

Exactly so whats the hesitation all the sudden, arguably Nolan would not be where he is right now without Heath. Would Inception have gotten the same hype? Would he have the same money/power/respect. He garnered an army of fanboys, crazed they maybe, their money spends. So why not now placate them with something he knows they want?

The differance is this time it's personal. I still believe it's a guilt trip Nolan is putting on himself because of Heath saying how exhausted the role had made him and he believes that's why he was taking so much medication which ultimately killed him.
 
Except this isn't The Prestige trilogy, It's...

The Dark Knight Trilogy. :wink1:

Nolan instilled that same sense that one would need the other and be doing it forever.

Well, unfortunately, for Nolan that died with Ledger. Yeah, the character of the Joker is considered much larger than any one man, but this is a specific version of the Joker. Christopher Nolan's (and Heath Ledger's) version on film. He's just not very comfortable with bringing in someone else to play that part in his films. I'm sure he didn't want people trying to compare the two takes either.
 
I'm not out of points. Other than being obstinate (as usual), you don't have one. The whole of TDK sets up Joker to appear in it's sequel, up to and including the dialogue when Batman faces off against him, which, according to the Nolancompoops, is meticulously and thoroughly thought through and every word placed in the script with intent and meaning. TDK set up Joker as the main antagonist for it's sequel. You're blatantly ignoring that and pulling the a-typical apologist bit, pretending like it doesn't matter because it doesn't suit your argument.

You can force feed yourself that crap all you want. Fact of the matter is it doesn't matter now because he's dead. The film works just as well if he was set up to be in TDKR and it was set up just as well if he's not in TDKR. You amazingly keep arguing that the Joker's dialouge 20 minutes before the actual ending of the film completely negates everything that comes after it, you know, during the actual ending of the film. TDK is Dent's storyline he's the only mention that matters in TDKR and the real ending of TDK sets that up perfectly. The Joker can monolouge all he wants about their fate, but like I said he's ____ing crazy so it doesn't matter what he believes and the reality he faces. A no mention is a non issue.
 
The Dark Knight Trilogy. :wink1:



Well, unfortunately, for Nolan that died with Ledger. Yeah, the character of the Joker is considered much larger than any one man, but this is a specific version of the Joker. Christopher Nolan's (and Heath Ledger's) version on film. He's just not very comfortable with bringing in someone else to play that part in his films. I'm sure he didn't want people trying to compare the two takes either.

I don't want him recast, I would have been happy with a quick line from Alfred, something like an update that Arkham is secure and still has Joker, or he got out and no ones seen him. Or Bruce reminding himself the man that killed Rachel and disgraced Dent and really started all this is still out there and it's not over just because Bane dies or gets caught.
 
Exactly so whats the hesitation all the sudden, arguably Nolan would not be where he is right now without Heath. Would Inception have gotten the same hype? Would he have the same money/power/respect. He garnered an army of fanboys, crazed they maybe, their money spends. So why not now placate them with something he knows they want?

The differance is this time it's personal. I still believe it's a guilt trip Nolan is putting on himself because of Heath saying how exhausted the role had made him and he believes that's why he was taking so much medication which ultimately killed him.

Does it matter? Either way it's his decision and if it isn't necessary and he decides against it for personal reasons why can't that be respected? I'd side with my own personal stance over the potential fanboy rage 100% of the time.
 
Considering Nolan always takes the complicated (story) route i'd say he should be forgiven if he decides to leave out a few key parts of its previous story. I see no big deal personally.

People can say what they want about his writing and film work but the fact remains, he delivers entertaining movies. And producing a "perfect" movie doesn't exist so it's a non issue (imo)
 
Because if it is personal, its the wrong reason, The joker didn't belong to Heath and he doesn't belong to Nolan. The series is littered with great little referances and easter eggs for Batman fans.

You can write them off and say this isn't the comics all you want but look at where he's drawing the source material from, Year One to The Dark Knight Returns you can make referance after referance from these movies to the comics.

Without the comics these movies don't exist, they don't bring in anywhere near the same audience or box office. I believe Nolan really is in a place as I've already said, where he just wants out of Batman and to move on, he doesn't need it anymore, it made him superfamous, gave him a gigantic following, the chances of him one upping TDK are incredibly slim, which means he could actually stand to hurt his rep and future film box offices by making a less worthy movie now. Even Bale seems eager to keep going in his latest interview, so I guess I'm having a tough time wondering why I should get so excited especially since we already know this franchise is basically obsolete come 2014 and a new movie.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top