This isn't the comics and I've read some great stories even in those without the Joker.
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!
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.
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.
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.
All out of non points so you turn to your comfort zone.
Absolutely. Non of it added to the storyline and the films would have been the same without them.
Except this isn't The Prestige trilogy, It's...
Nolan instilled that same sense that one would need the other and be doing it forever.
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.
The Dark Knight Trilogy.
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.
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.
Enter your email address to join: