The Dark Knight thread.

[ryhoyarbie]

Wha…? Whatever Nolan does (if he directs the next film) will bear no resemblence to what has come before so why not have Selina Kyle (I never said Catwoman) in the next film along with a very different Penguin? And who said they would be paired forces?

It is not my preference to have all or any particular combination of characters in the next film, but I liked the world of the Dark Knight being inhabited by several villainous forces. This film was not Batman vs. Joker. It was the Dark Knight vs. the criminal forces of Gotham.

The “Dark Knight” has an ensemble of villains with varying degrees of importance including Scarecrow, Two Face, Joker and Sal Maroni all classic Batman characters. Three relatively big ones.“Batman Begins” contained the famed Ra’s Al Ghul, Scarecrow, Carmine Falcone and of course Joe Chill. Of course many of these in first film are lesser-known to filmgoers, but comic book fans know each and every one.

You never run out of Batman bad guys.

One thing I don't like about the new Batman movies is that all sorts of villains are just thrown in there and some don't have a point, they're just there like the Scarecrow who I thought was a complete waste of a character in Begins. Atleast in the last four Batman films before Nolan came out with his version of Batman that the directors had a lot of time in the movie devoted for the villains like Two-Face, Freeze, Joker, Catwoman, Riddler. They weren't just thrown on screen for the sake of having them show up. The directors showed how the villains came to be, why they're messed up, etc.

For example, Michelle Pfeiffer's character wa sa lonely secretary. She worked hard but her boss at the end could have cared less about her and pushed her out of a window. She had no friends, no love life, just her cat. Once she got pushed out of the window, she woke up with the feeling that she had to change into something else because her past life was horrible. Hence why she became Catwoman.

The Joker, Jack Nicholson's character, had ambitions of taking control of Jack Palance's gang but for the longest time plated the number 2 guy. He was also messed up in the head, according to Keaton's Batman while reading his profile. Once he woke up as the Joker from falling down to a thing of chemicals, he killed Palance and took over the gang, and wanted to kill all of the people in Gotham, while dancing to a few Prince songs too.

With Nolan's movies, the villains are just there, like the Scarecrow. the Joker shows up but we have no idea why he wanted to become the Joker, although he told people two different versions as to why he became the way he is, as a joke to himself. (Maybe that makes Nolans Joker more scary?)

But that's just my opinion.

But for pairings, if Nolan had Ra's and Scarecrow working together, and Joker and Two-Face working together at the end, then with this same formula Nolan would have Penguin and Catwoman teamed up together in some form.

 

[peyjenk]

I liked not knowing the Joker's backstory. Who he is and where he came from don't matter to the movie, all that matters is that he's psycho. I think it makes it more powerful to not have the typical misunderstood, "they-pushed-me-to-it" villain. If you can't understand why the Joker is the way he is, he is that much scarier.

 

[frogboy4]

One thing I don't like about the new Batman movies is that all sorts of villains are just thrown in there and some don't have a point, they're just there like the Scarecrow who I thought was a complete waste of a character in Begins. Atleast in the last four Batman films before Nolan came out with his version of Batman that the directors had a lot of time in the movie devoted for the villains like Two-Face, Freeze, Joker, Catwoman, Riddler. They weren't just thrown on screen for the sake of having them show up. The directors showed how the villains came to be, why they're messed up, etc.

For example, Michelle Pfeiffer's character wa sa lonely secretary. She worked hard but her boss at the end could have cared less about her and pushed her out of a window. She had no friends, no love life, just her cat. Once she got pushed out of the window, she woke up with the feeling that she had to change into something else because her past life was horrible. Hence why she became Catwoman.

The Joker, Jack Nicholson's character, had ambitions of taking control of Jack Palance's gang but for the longest time plated the number 2 guy. He was also messed up in the head, according to Keaton's Batman while reading his profile. Once he woke up as the Joker from falling down to a thing of chemicals, he killed Palance and took over the gang, and wanted to kill all of the people in Gotham, while dancing to a few Prince songs too.

With Nolan's movies, the villains are just there, like the Scarecrow. the Joker shows up but we have no idea why he wanted to become the Joker, although he told people two different versions as to why he became the way he is, as a joke to himself. (Maybe that makes Nolans Joker more scary?)

But that's just my opinion.

But for pairings, if Nolan had Ra's and Scarecrow working together, and Joker and Two-Face working together at the end, then with this same formula Nolan would have Penguin and Catwoman teamed up together in some form.

Burton's Batmans, while enjoyable, have less to do with the source material and more to do with Burton's whim. He proudly professes to have never read a comic book and has even come off to many fans as judgmental to those who do. Tim Burton is a genius. His Edward Scissiorhands is one of my favorite films and I like the gothic pop-art look of his films but his version isn't really Batman. Schumacher's Batmans (while tapping a little more into the source material) don't really count in discussing the films. Nolan's account is a reboot. Previous versions do not exist in his tellings.

The Joker has no origin. That's the bit with him. He isn't some pudgy middle-aged gangster. We're not really supposed to know where he came from. The only reference to that in comic form hints that any story he tells is made up by him to fit a situation. Heck, maybe he's Tim Burton.

I feel the personalities and character motivations unfold gracefully in Nolan's films. The teaming up of villains in the Dark Knight didn't quite happen nor did it need to. There was a bit of manipulation at play, but Nolan goes for more of a real world view than Burton or Adam West Batman tellings. I don't think he just - throws villains at the screen with no point. He crafts a more realistic and chilling portrayal of urban crime. He crafts actual stories inspired by ample source material that began 69 years ago.

There are different tellings of comic book characters (like in Greek myths) and Nolan goes to that source first and devises a grittier real world way to film it. He honors the source material. The only other entertainment to really do that is Batman the Animated Series. The Justice League character came from that origin. The recently defunct The Batman was fairly close and the Batman Gotham Knight DVD that just came out is too - and it's the most attractive looking.

Previous versions of Burton, Schumacher and Adam West are akin to taking a favorite, classic little piece of music, having a cover band dub through it and give it some dance club techno beats. Sure, sometimes it sounds fun, but there's something much more valuable that gets lost in the mix for the sake of current trends.

Whatever Nolan does it will likely be different from what I have said and far exceed my expectations. I defer to his judgment. He just pulled off the best movie of the year, the best Batman film to date and also managed to make an astounding success. The one thing I will say for Tim Burton's telling is that in a round-about way it eventually led to this one. I like his and some of the other versions out there, but it is nice to finally see a Batman this close to the original material.

 

[peyjenk]

See, I thought that it wasn't until the 80s or so that the comics started getting grittier and darker. I thought that the Adam West Batman was fairly in tune with the original comics, and Tim Burton and the folks at DC reinvented the story into a darker mode sometime in the 80s. Looking back at the serial movies of the 40s and 30s, you see a lot more kitsch than grit. I think it all works, whether campy or classy, but on different levels and for different reasons.

 

[muppetwriter]

Wow. There are some excellent points being made here. And I agree with some of what you're both mentioning. But it's too soon to tell if Nolan's going with a third installment (although you can be certain Warner Bros. and DC Comics will push him into making one, just like Sony and Marvel are forcing Sam Raimi into making more Spidey flicks).

Jamie, you're absolutely right about how Nolan depicts his villains. I was doing the math on how he introduces them into the story, and it does seem like he incorporates a lot of backstories from the comics in a "real world" way. The way I saw it was that The Joker was introduced in a way to where we had no clue of his history as to why he became who he is, just the same way that we were vague on how Ra's Al Ghul became leader of the League of Shadows and why he had chosen his methods of bringing balance to the world.

I agree with many who have said that it's more creepy and enjoyable to be held in the dark about Joker's origins in this film, because if we had known just why or how it happened, we would've gained sympathy for the character. And I'm a little bit tired of gaining sympathy for villains, unless they're like Sandman from Spider-Man 3 (who actually needed that sympathy). I wanted to be terrified by these villains--Joker was convincingly so, while Two-Face was just surprisingly that way after his "transformation".

Sometimes it just drags the story if we got more information than we needed to know. So, in response to ryhoyarbie's comments, yes...it does make Nolan's Joker more scary when we don't know much about his history. The character for so many years in comics has been a mystery that no one for sure can explain why he wanted to become the "Clown Prince of Crime". Yet that's what makes the character so awesome.

If Nolan does make a third film, I would focus more on Batman's way of fixing his reputation rather than who he goes up against, because the city still needs him no matter what he has done. And if he does go up against someone (like Penguin or maybe The Riddler), then perhaps his enemy could become his ally. Just a thought.

 

[frogboy4]

I'm in agreement with most of this.

According to his memoirs and documentaries on the subject, Bob Kane was never completely pleased with the Adam West program or many of the earlier Batman tellings. He seemed to feel that they were poking fun at his creation, but he was pleased with the attention and other elements that really shined like the Batmobile. Batman didn't become the darker figure of the Dark Knight until the 80s, but he was not intended to be a slapstick character. Some comic tellings were a little on the goofy side for all iconic comic book heroes.

Some things in the mythos never changed. I like how Ra's character was transformed from one thousands-year-old figure, as in the comics, into a leadership position passed down through many generations in Batman Begins. Nolan's version is the later grittier Batman, but even when lifting the dark gritty elements out of the equation the technical story and origins of the character are by far the most true to the source material.

I find Tim Burton's choice to alter the Batman mythos and have the Joker kill the Waynes less interesting than the actual random murder by common thief Joe Chill. There's an actual story in place that I find much more valuable than many past filmmakers contrivances of convenience. Burton admitted his disinterest in researching much of Batman's history. I still see his version as a very attractive and charismatic "pop art/remix" of the Batman with little depth or accuracy.

The Burton and Shumaker films appeared to multiply villains and supporting characters in a way that cluttered the screen and bogged down the story with back stories either trite or over-the-top. I do like parts of all the tellings, but as fan and cinema file I find Nolan's to be the finest, most accurate and altogether enjoyable work thus far. I doubt it could ever be matched.

The Dark Knight breaths. It exhales the stories and characters of Gotham in a real world way that makes more sense rather than some connect-the-dots send-up or mere facsimile. But those are just my ideas on the subject.

Nolan has expressed disinterest in the Penguin character even though early reports had Phillip Seymour Hoffman cast in the role for this film. Burton had trouble with the character as originally imagined too. There's a special place in my heart for Devito's performance. Who knows if we'll see him in any new telling?

The idea of introducing Robin appalls Bale so I doubt we'll see that character. It is too soon anyway and has never been done right in live action. I think Batman needs to become more disillusioned before mentoring that character because it is Robin who causes Bruce Wayne to come to terms with his loss.

This is why I'd like to see Bruce courting a mysterious Selina Kyle. I'm not certain Catwoman needs to officially make an appearance. Heck, her appearance could reboot the Catwoman franchise that Berry's film destroyed.

Anyway, so ahead of things. I just like the possibilities! I wonder when an announcement of a sequel will occur. They seem to put out such press statements quickly these days.

 

[Winslow Leach]

Count me in as another who felt there didn't need to be a Joker origin story in The Dark Knight. I didn't want to know where he came from, or how he got his scars, etc.

Again, I'm not a fan of the Burton/Schumacher films...never cared for Nicholson's Joker, and Tommy Lee Jones's scenery-chewing Two-Face in Batman Forever was a true example of a one-dimensional villain. Although Jim Carrey made an interesting Riddler, IMO...

I do hope Nolan returns for a third go-round.

 

[RedPiggy]

I can understand if Ivy is too unrealistic. However, I would think pairing Cat with Harley would work just as well. They both don't have bizarre powers, they both want Batman's head on a platter, we haven't had a decent villainness yet, and I think you could have Harley/Ivy's relationship dynamic with a merge of Cat and Ivy in terms of personality.

I definitely don't want Robin. If anything, it should fast forward to the Beyond era if they want a protege. I love me some Terry.

I'm still concerned with Riddler. He just comes off as a more academic Joker. I didn't enjoy many things about that most recent Animated series ... but I think I actually LIKED Robert Englund's goth Riddler. I liked 60's Riddler ... but you need someone like Jim Carrey to pull off a good imitation of that and it's been done, so it shouldn't be repeated. And I'm completely against retreading Penguin.

 

[frogboy4]

I can understand if Ivy is too unrealistic. However, I would think pairing Cat with Harley would work just as well. They both don't have bizarre powers, they both want Batman's head on a platter, we haven't had a decent villainness yet, and I think you could have Harley/Ivy's relationship dynamic with a merge of Cat and Ivy in terms of personality.

I definitely don't want Robin. If anything, it should fast forward to the Beyond era if they want a protege. I love me some Terry.

I'm still concerned with Riddler. He just comes off as a more academic Joker. I didn't enjoy many things about that most recent Animated series ... but I think I actually LIKED Robert Englund's goth Riddler. I liked 60's Riddler ... but you need someone like Jim Carrey to pull off a good imitation of that and it's been done, so it shouldn't be repeated. And I'm completely against retreading Penguin.

Oooh. You have an interesting point. I would like to see more of a female factor in the continuing Dark Knight saga.

New Pitch:
In Arkham Asylum the Joker is locked up (never to physically seen in respect to Ledger) but still pulling some strings in a few brief scenes from the dark shadows of his cell thus transforming his therapist into Harley Quinn to do his bidding with or without Catwoman.

I still think Ivy could be placed in a future film as an eco terrorist sans-costume. You're also right about Riddler. The character is like a withdrawn version of the Joker, but there's room for some creativity to grow the character. However, there do need to be more women in Batman and Bruce's life.

 

[ryhoyarbie]

You guys aren't some of the people who parade the Dark Knight board on imdb.com and then go to the Batman 89 board and post useless insults about how bad of a movie it was?