Never going to happen of course but thematically it would be a nice way to follow it up.

Of course, it doesn't matter. Dent could be retconned alive if TPTB want him. So it's pointless to argue the matter.

Piece o' cake, right?

I think you mean something like "vital".

Detrimental, as used in a sentence: If you want to make a bet that the Joker is going to be recast in the next movie, that would be detrimental to your bank account.

And by the way, I am not saying it's obvious he was alive either, although I do believe they wasted a lot of potential by killing him. To assume that there was no possibility of an attempt to fuck with the audience strikes me as seriously unsophisticated with respect to narratives in any of a variety of formats.

Jesus, are you and Beaks the type of people who found Pulp Fiction confusing the first time through?

And Bale & Nolan will be nowhere around.

I certainly wouldn't take the fact that Bats survived a fall from the same height as any indication that TF did, seeing that one of them was a supremely fit individual wearing hi-tech body armour, and the other was a lawyer who had recently suffered major medical trauma. Y'know, shock, blood loss, that sort of thing.

Nolan saying he had no future plans for Joker in a third film is absolutely a blatant lie.

CS/SHH!: That's not a problem in comic book movies. You could still come back.

Eckhart: I think in contract negotiations it's a problem.

Just saying.

Fanboys: See? He's totally alive!

Honestly, I think we can stick with three-side vibe in the third film without adding a second villain: Batman vs Gotham (exemplified by Gordon) vs The Riddler. The Riddler is criming, both Batman and Gordon are trying to stop him while the former avoids the latter. It would essentially be a stealth film. And of course, the big action sequence midway through the film would be Batman getting captured and his identity revealed to Gordon.

As for the Riddler, I reiterate my earlier position that he should be played as dour and devoid of humor as possible; when he's in the room, the temperature should feel like it's dropped 10 degrees. There should be no uneasy laughter from the audience like with the Joker; instead, uncomfortable silence. Methodical, precise, and so damn smart he needs to announce it to everybody.

And BTW, I loathed Batman Begins. So I'm not one of the ridiculous fanboys. TDK just hit all the right notes with me.

Anyone got any other Batman titles that could be used in the vein of The Dark Knight?

And why should we? Audiences should revel in the tale being told. It's like the dicks who get off on working out twists before they happen in films. I've done it before but I didn't get any real joy out of it - it robs the film of it's reveal which is normally one of the highpoints of a story being told. And, being as the audience is paying to see that story unfold, there is nothing wrong with doing that. Second-guessing stuff because that's what CAN happens in movies doesn't mean we should always be looking for it TO happen.

All caps has *long* been considered SHOUTING on the Interblag. Seems silly in retrospect (I remember chatting on bbs's back in the 80s that you only could type in Caps on), but that's what it is.

See, underlying the thesis of Chaos in the movie is the idea of Deception. And not just the Joker, either (it would take all day to write them all down). You have Harvey Dent making his own luck flipping a two-headed coin. You have Lucius Fox carrying two cell phones with him in Hong Kong. You have Alfred burning letters. You have Batman saving someone as Bruce Wayne and taking a ballet out to his yacht for an alibi. And most importantly, you have Jim Gordon *pretending to be dead*. (cue Vultan's GORDON'S ALIVE?!?!?)

Throw all of that together, I don't see how anyone can watch the end of the movie and not question it. Regardless of what the answer is, to expect someone to spend two-and-a-half-hours getting hit left and right with twists and turns to then take the last few minutes at face value is asking too much.

I have decreed.

Or if you want the character to be younger, how about Elijah Wood doing a pseudo-riff on his Sin City character (obviously with verbalization, but with the same compressed, contained, focused energy)?

Nolan builds his movies to very specific points and purposes. If Dent is alive, the entire point TDK built to is invalidated.

The entire movie builds to Batman taking on the role of the "Dark Knight" and becoming the hunted outcast in order to give people the hope it needs...the great memory of the White Knight Harvey Dent...rather than let the Joker win by having people see what Harvey has become.

If Dent is walking around cackling as Two-Face in a sequel, it makes the "Dark Knight" meaningless...the Joker HAS won, and all the themes that made the movie rise above standard superhero fare -- heroism, sacrifice, and the nature of people -- are rendered meaningless.

So, let me ask you...do you think Nolan would do that?????? Invalidate all the mature themes he painstakingly worked into his film in order to have a little "fanboy" twist????

No.

However, most intelligent people debate over themes and what the movie was trying to say, not whether a character who fell and broke his neck is really dead.

I watched Gone Baby Gone last night and debated the end with my friend...both of us disagreeing with each other over the final decision. What we did NOT do was sit around wondering if a cop that took two bullets in the chest was still alive, or if another character who took one in the noggin would be miraculously revived for a sequel.

INTELLIGENT debate my friend...that is the key.

;)

Probably the most annoying thing in the world is when someone gets on a soapbox to tell others to get off theirs.

The Joker didn't win. The people didn't blow themselves up. The people thought that Harvey died a hero, and their faith in humanity was restored. Only Batman and Gordon (and the Joker) knew about TwoFace's murderous rampage. That's the point of Batman taking the blame. TwoFace coming back to "vindicate" Batman would, as I pointed out, go against everything in the movie.

Watch it again, you might get it.

And yeah, I think Nolan is talented enough to fit in 47 villains, 10 dancing Roman Gladiators, and cameos by Spock, Gandhi, and Sarah Palin's whore daughter, but that doesn't mean he will.

Not because I am in the director's head, but because common sense says no. Because while I may not operate at the level of brilliance of Nolan, I am operating at quite a few rungs above you who mistake what a director CAN do for what he logically WOULD do. For that matter, you can argue that Ras Al Ghul never died too. (Oh shit, don't get started on that please.) And actually, I'd accept that argument before I'd agree with Dent being alive, because Ras' death didn't really close any thematic loops, just served as an obligatory "villain death" at the end of the film. Likewise, if Batman didn't save the Joker and he fell to the ground, I would say (if it weren't for Heath's death) that the Joker could be "brought back to life" too. Because, again, his death wasn't thematically relevalant.

See the pattern yet?

If you get what the movie is saying and why the movie ended the way it did, then you will see the logic in it and why Harvey is dead.

If not, God bless you, and remember to call 911 if you eat too many crayons.

.

And Memories...thanks for adding some much needed intelligence to this discussion.

Once again, I feel the need to state that I believe the ending was ambiguous, not that he was alive or dead.

I mean, look at the recent Spidey 4/5 news. It's not a done deal, but it's still not over til it's over.