Christopher Nolan's Batman 3 - It Starts and Ends with Time

June 27, 2009
by Brandon Lee Tenney

In the recent weeks passed, there has been a lot of talk (coming from this Batman-on-Film.com article or this MTV piece from Christian Bale) about what I'll refer to as Batman 3, or to put this prospective film in context, the third film of what I always hoped (expected) would be Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy (essentially, what is the sequel to The Dark Knight). That talk has all been negative, unfortunately. Film journalists, bloggers, and fans alike (as seen here) have been waxing pessimistic about the rumors that Nolan may not return to what is, ostensibly, both his largest and, in my opinion, very best work to date.

It's common knowledge that The Dark Knight took a lot out of Nolan. The production was long, shooting entire scenes with the monstrosities that are the IMAX cameras was arduous, and, of course, Batman's cowl was not the only dark hood to hang over the film. Heath Ledger, whose Oscar winning performance as The Joker will be forever remembered and celebrated, died while the film was in post-production. While all of Ledger's scenes had been shot, his death cast a dark, deep shadow over the film. And an especially dark shadow over Chris Nolan. To everyone who's seen The Dark Knight, it's also quite clear that The Joker's role was never meant to end. "We are destined to do this forever," The Joker postulates, hanging upside down, caught but not subdued — merely another layer of his chaos. But, with Heath Ledger's death (and with him, The Joker's), that anticipated third film seems all but dead, too. The Joker was meant to continue as Batman's foil into the follow up to The Dark Knight. And therein lies the problem.

Where can Christopher Nolan and the Batman franchise go from here?

Batman Begins is Batman's birth. The Dark Knight is both his rise and fall to a place even darker than he thought possible. Should, as I expect, Batman 3 continue to follow this classic biblical structure, it would be Batman's resurrection, his transcendence. The bread crumbs are there, resting atop Gotham's pavement.

But it is there where my thoughts, my ideas, my suggestions branch away.

It starts and ends with time. Time, rather a time jump, is a two-fold solution when applied to Batman 3. Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are not separated by much of it at all. Bruce Wayne returns to Gotham and brings Batman with him in Batman Begins. We see the first effects of Batman on his city. We're hopeful. We're excited. Crime recoils, unsure and afraid. But, like Bruce Wayne, we are naive. Batman's very presence causes Gotham to descend even further into madness. When The Dark Knight begins, we're left to fill in the blanks: Batman has garnered a dedicated following. He's the very symbol he set out to be. He's more of a welcomed celebrity than the caped and cowled, distrusted vigilante. And then we see him fall, with Gotham close behind and the people of Gotham being pulled in tow. The small amount of time between the first two films is of necessity. They are two halves, each a side of the same coin, one polished, one scarred. But Batman 3 needs not follow that same dynamic. Could circumstances have been different, sure, Batman 3 could have easily picked up shortly after Batman speeds into the night. But it never had to. And it shouldn't have to now.

Batman 3 should take place years, if not decades, in the future. Who says resurrection has to be three days? By aging Gotham, it ages the characters (thus avoiding a contemporary recasting of The Joker). By aging Gotham, it raises the stakes. Gotham, the fallen city, having been sunk for years now. A city without any hope. A population without a hero. Batman, still a distrusted wild card. Batman, still torn apart by the loss of Rachel. Of Harvey. Of Alfred - he has to go. But we gain a more mature Batman. One who, in the decades passed, has now seen it all. One who has been continually hated by the very people he protects. One who won't let himself become good in their eyes, become that celebrity. One who truly knows how to use his rage, his torment, rather than the Batman we've seen who only thinks he does.

A longer stretch of time affords the creators a sizable amount of leeway. Sure, while we must lose Alfred, perhaps Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox would then fulfill that role. Not a butler, but a confidant and engineer behind-the-scenes working from The Bat Cave beneath the long-since rebuilt Wayne Manor. Perhaps The Joker was, in fact, captured and contained in Arkham for however long it has been between The Dark Knight and Batman 3, but he has only now finally escaped. The Joker wouldn't need to look the same, in fact he shouldn't. His already warped mind would be even more twisted. And Batman and Bruce Wayne both would finally have to confront the very catalyst of their descent. The singular reason for their own madness over the unseen time between films. Open old wounds that (though fresh for us, the audience) have been long scarred over but never healed underneath.

Time passed is story gained. It is permission to complete a tonally structured trilogy as originally intended — though perhaps not as originally conceived. It's also structure gained. It opens the story to the possibility of a more fractured narrative where we can be filled in through flashbacks about the state of Batman while also providing natural places within the film to include some more classic Batman fare — flashbacks that, while in tone, would further the story, explain the status quo, and also show us some action of his years passed. Fights with Penguin. With Cat Woman. With The Riddler. Characters who just don't fit the tonal landscape of Nolan's Batman as a main villain, but would work fine as vignette-like flashbacks. Batman 3 could bypass all of the nonessential franchise films that every property creates. With a story set in the future, any story like, say, the one from Spider-Man 3, that would have happened without us even knowing. We'd only be privy to the after effects, the scars.

Nolan's Batman Trilogy was never, and isn't, meant to be about the happenings and escapades of Batman. This is not villain-of-the-week Caped Crusader. Nolan's Batman is a study of hope's triumph over corruption, over evil. Batman Begins may be the very beginning, but The Dark Knight is as much a beginning, maybe even more so. We don't need a middle. I don't want a middle. Tell me the middle, make me feel it, know it, right before the end. It's the end that I want. Batman 3 is the end that this series needs. It's the poignant finish to an already transcendent would-be-trilogy. And it all starts and ends with time. The future is where Batman 3 needs to take place, a future of bleak hopelessness, a future far enough away that the logistical issues of the contemporary universe are no longer an issue, a future that allows a bold structure but tonal congruence, a future at the very brink in need of a savior — a savior who must overcome his reluctance, his fear, and his foil in order to truly make the difference he's been unable to make for so long. Its title need not be so literal as Batman Begins nor so heady as The Dark Knight — simply, but thoughtfully, its title should be The Batman.

Even if it takes five years or ten, this is a series, a franchise, deserving of its very final chapter. And it's Christopher Nolan who should be the one to provide us with it. With closure. With hope. With The Batman.

Discover More: Discussion, Editorials, Opinions

•

Reader Feedback - 273 Comments »

wow man u should be a screen writer that was awsome

cheater on Jun 27, 2009

What a great article. Hopefully Nolan returns because if he doesn't, I don't think the next Batman film will be any good at all. Not like it should. I guess we shall all see.

Itri on Jun 27, 2009

Sounds a lot like "The Dark Knight Returns". But you are right about time.
A thing that I would like in a third film is the political effect of Batman (another idea from TDKR).
Give me an army trying to hunt Batman and I'll be there.

PD: No Robin!

Jonathan on Jun 27, 2009

and then maybe that could set up a Batman Beyond movie for the post-Nolan era.

samir on Jun 27, 2009

Great piece. I agree with just about everything you said. In my opinion, the third film could mimick the first one - structurally speaking. I'd like to see another Batman movie with flashbacks the way Nolan handled them in Begins.

miguel on Jun 27, 2009

I'm not used to seeing pitches on this site. It was good, nonetheless.

Keith on Jun 27, 2009

I more or less agree with what you have to say. I surely hope there is a Batman 3 and Nolan is on board. A future take could be interesting, just show how bleak the world could get. But for now we can only wish.

Bauzer on Jun 27, 2009

That is great. I would actually love to see that happen. I doubt it will but I hope it does.

Dylan on Jun 27, 2009

Great, really enjoyed it…10 years in the future…IDk but I do agree if this is the end of Nolan directing any Batman movie then i want it to go out with a bang!!

tankmaster on Jun 27, 2009

good! it's a very good article!

caro on Jun 27, 2009

great story idea! I completely agree with you! Nolan (if he does come back) will hopefully present us with a story much like that. also the title "the Batman" would really present a feel of this is the final and definitive telling of the batman's tale. and i also agree with #3.

taylor on Jun 27, 2009

This is the only way Batman can come back…really perfect premise. Great article, Brandon!!

Elycia on Jun 27, 2009

This is a great idea. I still think they need to go with the whole idea that they bring in a detective to find out who Batman is, and that detectives becomes obsessed and turns out to be the Riddler, but this could happen in a future time, after years of trying to find hi they finally bring in an outside source. The Riddlers could have such a devastating effect on Gotham, do something so big that when Batman comes to save the day they realize how needed he really is.

Derek on Jun 27, 2009

Terrible idea. I appreciate the thought and effort but it's a bad idea.

teyhtr on Jun 27, 2009

Absolutely not.

Chris N. on Jun 27, 2009

The best articles on this site are the ones that aren't by Mr.Billington. Bravo Brandon.

Will Dearborn on Jun 27, 2009

Nicely written and organized very well. But I don't think it would work out. You don't go from small year's leap in chronological aspect of the movie and then just skip decades to make an appealing story with the joker. Sounds too "Easy" and convenient.

I prefer they'd do a story not involving the joker first hand but with a mention.

KenDoll on Jun 27, 2009

Where copycat Batmen came about as a result of Batman, I'd love to see the reality of the Joker lead to copycat criminals. Everyone talks about how the Riddler shaes so many thematic elements with the Joker, so I think that would be the way to go. Also, the Riddler could address the mystery of Batman, but also the mystery of the Joker. You could have Joker's presence exist throughout the movie in negative space. The Riddler could be one of the people, trying to get a grip on these two larger-than-life personalities.

DCompose on Jun 27, 2009

I like the idea of going into the future, but the stuff about flashbacks with other villains just didn't work - it sounds like a B-movie, and I can't envision Nolan doing anything like that.

Timothy on Jun 27, 2009

Originally, I thought that the Joker must not return for a while, but by skipping ahead in time, he could be an extremely different character. This sounds like the perfect ending to Nolan's (hopefully) trilogy. The only problem is convincing the studio. Why would a movie studio agree to skip years of potential Batman stories and villains in order to get to a fitting ending. It would make the best film, but would they see it as a huge loss of money?

Billy Soistmann on Jun 27, 2009

While clearly Chris Nolan is a brilliant filmmaker, he does not own the Batman mythology. You seem to be envisioning a grand cinematic trilogy that is will be the finality of a character that has been with us 70 years. We been entertained with comics, cartoons, tv shows, short stories, and now you'd expect us to wait until eternity when Nolan comes down off the mountain top and decides to maybe, just maybe make the Batman movie of YOUR dreams? That type of high-minded, far-flung thinking will kill a good character who just needs a good story.

Chris Hoskins on Jun 27, 2009

I think the idea of this, in theory, is good, but no matter how you do it, no matter how many years in the future it is set, the majority of the people will not accept anyone else in the role of Joker in the next Batman film. In maybe two or three films time, yea, like Heath Ledger took over from Jack Nicholson, but not in the foreseeable future…But I hope Joker does come back, doubt it will be with Chris Nolan though.

Maverick on Jun 27, 2009

It's an arbitrary idea, thrusting the story into the future would compromise the conventions of continuity with the existing actors, first and foremost. In addition, this article–although good, is really a perfect pitch for a "Batman Beyond" flick. Let us not forget that Harvey Dent, although he died in TDK, could still return (in the comic world anyone can be brought back). A futuristic Batman undergoing the same psychological issues wouldn't really bring anything new to the franchise. I believe that having a plot only to serve the Joker would be pointless. Heath Ledger did a great job and yes, 'The Joker' character died with him. No one could possibly pick up where Ledger left off. It's feels logical to bring in 'The Riddler' and the time is right. Having an actor of Johnny Depp's caliber could bring a great succession of a villainous persona that could mirror that of 'The Joker', if not, enhancing the parameters set forth by Ledger and allowing 'The Riddler' to plunge deeper into the darkness. This could make for a greater character study of psychologically unstable individuals with their issues and motivations!
#18 You make good points!

Spider on Jun 27, 2009

I don't care what the timeline is. If Nolan is behind the camera I'm all for it. If not, I won't be interested - bale or not.

Cat on Jun 27, 2009

Don't even try it. Why does everything have to be a trilogy? Dark Knight was arguably the best "superhero film" ever made. Just leave it at that. Because since TDK was such a money grabber, the producers and studios are going to have even more influence, because they'll be throwing ever more money at the project. What happens when you have over-involved studios throwing MOUNDS of cash at a film? You get Spider-man 3.

Leave the franchise alone, but let's be honest, we all know they won't. There's money to be had, and money makes the world turn.

Icarus on Jun 27, 2009

"The Dark Knight Returns" spoiler warning

Amazing. That would really bring the atmosphere from TDKR, although the Superman fight (overcoming a Godlike opponent and thus showing Batman's harmony with inner demons) and retirement/alcohol problems would really be missing (maybe Superman being swapped with another, nemesis-like opponent [older Joker? But who would dare play one now?]), but the "hope's triumph over corruption and evil" main straw from BB and TDK would have to be there.
Time, definitely. Events in between maybe shown in (more than one?) animated movie (although I'd certainly HOPE that they would make them far better than Gotham Knight) because some Batman-universe villains are just not suited for a Nolan movie, and show those suited through said flashbacks.
As for the politics, I don't think it should be involved, it's just too big of a hassle and an issue.

And two more technical things:
first, R rating, please, at least in the DVD/BR versions
second, maybe Batman could really start doing ninjutsu instead of that "fighting system". What really lacked in his fighting was expression of brutality, and if not so much in second, that's what third film needs and must have.

Protke! on Jun 27, 2009

I said pretty much the same thing here a while back. Just do an adaptation of The Dark Knight Returns, re-cast an older Joker, problem solved. Actually, I think it might be better to get Burton back onboard with an adaption of DKR, since that book really is too sci-fi and surreal to fit with Nolan's version. Get Keaton and Nicholson back, both of which are about the right age to portray the characters.

Scott Reed on Jun 27, 2009

I wouldn't completely agree on that Mr. Scott
Nolan+Bale=works.
As for the surreality of TDKR, yes, it would be to surreal for a standard 3rd part and that's why only the full atmosphere and mind state of the main characters should be transfered to the screen.
As for Nicholson… DAMN that would be nice. But i don't think he'd do it, and wouldn't do it the right way, since he already played a different Joker, and I don't see how Heath-Joker could ever evolve into Jack-Joker. But it would still be nice

Protke! on Jun 27, 2009

You can't bring the Joker back, except in flashbacks… if at all. In this Batman world the Joker belongs to Heath Ledger (RIP). If you bring him back, it has to be a cameo… like Scarecrow in The Dark Knight. Someone else can "physically" play him but tonally the character belongs to Heath Ledger now. I like the Riddler as a foe, but too similar to the Joker, in my opinion. I never read a comic book from the Batman universe. My first experience with Batman was Michael Keaton and Jack Nicholson, and I was 6 at the time. Now I'm almost 26 and I thoroughly love the 2 Nolan Batman movies. Mr. Nolan needs to close this out, and I think he knows it. He has created a story that rivals the first 2 Star Wars movies in terms of story telling. He isn't George Lucas in terms of creative control. But if Dreamworks/Speilberg can throw all the money in the bank at Micheal Bay, I think Warner Bros. can do the same for Nolan (a for more accomplished director), Bale and company. Give us a story that ties up the loose ends without offending the Batman mythology and history. Christopher Nolan and his brother are smart businessmen and have something cooking. Give it time, I'm sure it will be worth it.

Dustin on Jun 27, 2009

sounds great, and it allows nolan to take a few years off to recoup before headin at batman 3 full blast, but a new villain, can be much like the joker, but not the joker. hell even have harvey dent be the bad guy if need be

harrison on Jun 27, 2009

Amen to #16

Cameron Cubbison on Jun 27, 2009

Great article Brandon.

David from MovieViral on Jun 27, 2009

heres something why not recast an actor to play The Joker yes i said it recast a different actor to play The Joker it was sad that Heath Ledger died but if The Joker was to continue to the 3rd Batman movie i think Nolan should recast an actor whos willing to play The Joker.

Even actor Richard Harris who played Dumbledore in Harry Potter died and he got recasted and played by a different actor Michael Gambon. Michael Gambon performance was not different from Richard Harris you cant even tell the differents. Nolan should recast and find an actor who can still bring The Joker to the big screen once again.

alot of people saying The Riddler should be in the next film but why not characters like Black Mask, Hush or even Deadshot these characters never been shown on the big screen and i think they should.

anyway you need to check this out an 3D Animated fan film trailer called Arkham done by Paul B. Frieling. it features Batman villains the Joker and Harley Quinn also you can see some Harvey Dent hints in this trailer.

Arkham film trailer- Directed by Paul B. Frieling

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGSvaVL0lK4

also heres the official website to watch the trailer in HQ

http://www.arkham-themovie.com/

movieboy on Jun 27, 2009

GREAT ARTICLE !! Ingenious imagination & well written. I agree with #1.!!
Barbara

Barbara on Jun 27, 2009

It was mentioned in the article and in the comments, but I think it should really be spelled out: A recast would be the worst possible outcome for the series.

On a different note, I reeaallllyyy like the idea of flashing back to other villans. It would bring them into this new series, without forcing them to fit the tone (or worse, changing the tone of the film to fit the characters). Nolan has taken a really interesting tone with this trilogy, and if that means sacrificing the screentime of a few (of the many) Batman villans, that's fine. Great article, Brandon!

Nick Pettit on Jun 27, 2009

Very well said.

Andrew on Jun 27, 2009

No, to the article. The jump in years may be a bit jarring, I always envisioned it picking up a few months after the end of The Dark Knight. Not to say that it couldn't work, but it's seems like too much of a jump.

As for specualtion on a sequel, you're right in many ways. The theme of Batman Begins was fear. How fear is used to control people and how Bruce Wayne must overcome and become that which he fears most.
The Dark Knight's theme was escalation and how Batman's very existence fuels further criminals to act and how people must go to extraordinary lengths in drastic times.
The villains in the films are very closely connected with the themes. In Begins, Scarecrow's use of the fear toxin and Ra's teaching Bruce to overcome his fear. In The Dark Knight, the Joker is a product of escalation and Two-Face is as well when he believes that he must take extreme measures to defeat the one's who are constantly gaining on him.
So what will be the theme of the next Batman? It might be a stretch, but I noticed many biblical connections in The Dark Knight. The portrayal of Batman as a Christ-like figure who metaphorically sacrifices himself for the sins of others. I think redemption is a perfect theme.

There's a specific reason that Nolan put the titles at the END of the films. In Begins, the title being at the end signifies how Batman has now begun his crusade. In The Dark Knight, The title at the end shows how Batman has transformed into a lonely, brooding figure from the events he's been through. What a lot of people don't realize is that The Dark Knight is almost as much an origin story as Batman Begins was. At the end of The Dark Knight, Batman is now the character he always was in the comics. An outcast vigilante who is distrusted, not loved. The title of The Batman is already taken by that new animated show but I loved the choice of title for The Dark Knight, it signified that it was MORE than a Batman movie and I think Nolan will continue that.

Contrary to popular belief, both films in the series had multiple villains. All these villains seem to follow basic molds and if held true to form then it's safe to assume the villains in the third film will too. It usually goes: The Mob Boss, The Pawn, The Mastermind
Batman Begins - Carmine Falcone (The Mob Boss), Scarecrow (The Pawn), Ra's Al Ghul (The Mastermind)
The Dark Knight - Sal Maroni (The Mob Boss), Two-Face (The Pawn), The Joker (The Mastermind)
If the third film follows this form then you can fill in the blanks yourself about the most logical choices of villains.

My guess, Rupert Thorne (The Mob Boss), Black Mask (The Pawn), The Riddler (The Mastermind).

SlashBeast on Jun 27, 2009

First off, the whole "Nolan isn't returning" deal is really little more than internet rumors spread out of control. Nolan said he'd return if there was a good idea for a sequel and there was a good script. The Dark Knight only came out a year ago, just give it some time.

Governor on Jun 27, 2009

I think this is a great idea. I would love to see an older Joker with different personality characteristics only inspired by Ledger's performance.

However, I don't think anyone should have the mindset that this is exactly the way Batman 3 needs to be, like this article seems to suggest. We should be open to whatever they decide to do, particularly if the writers behind the first two write it and Nolan comes back to direct or produce. I don't think it is a requirement for the Joker to come back. I'm fine with him just being captured and losing his mind in Arkham Asylum - perhaps even to the point of death.

But I do think Tenney's idea would be an excellent way to go.

Dan Geer on Jun 27, 2009

Stick to blogging, dude.

ChrisB on Jun 27, 2009

sounds extremely good

minus the flashbacks of penguin, catwoman, and the riddler….that would totally ruin the seriousness of the movie

yes on Jun 27, 2009

joker does not belong to ledger. people act like the turned water into wine in tdk.

bad movie on Jun 27, 2009

Very interesting indeed.

K-man on Jun 27, 2009

Recasting The Joker is a lose-lose situation. If you recast, there's going to be endless scrutiny and a lot of people are going to be offended that another person would try and take on a character that belonged to Ledger.
On the other hand, if you don't recast, the third Batman might underwhelm and the intended presence of The Joker in Batman's life will be absent, removing a lot of potential for the film.

My take, I say recast. What Ledger created was nothing short of fantastic and will forever be rmemebered and will haunt us forever. With his memory in mind, I doubt Ledger put all that effort in so that the character would just be retired and swept under the rug. The ACTOR of The Joker is dead, the CHARACTER of the Joker is alive. The Joker is an integral force in the Batman mythos and it would be a shame to simply retire the character. Another actor can take up the reigns and tastefully keep consistency with Ledger's performance but I want to see new sides to the character that another actor can add.

But in no way do I believe that The Joker should be the MAIN villain in the next film. He can't be just a cameo either (It worked for Scarecrow because he was always a bit villain in the films anyway). He has to be a MINOR villain, possibly a behind the scenes Hannibal Lecter type character who shows up in a few scenes.

Prototype on Jun 27, 2009

Brandon, this is a brilliant idea and someone needs to foward this to Mr Nolan.

????? on Jun 27, 2009

I honestly think the next film should be shot like an independant movie! Set most of the film in arkhum asylum, like they do with the new video game. But instead of Batman going in as a hero, he should go in as a mental patient like the Joker!

At the end of The Dark Knight he becomes a fugitive, so I say that in the next film he gets captured and goes into Arkhum. It's just an idea, but I believe that this is a totally cool way to do the next film. Keep the joker in the back ground for most of the film and introduce some new villians that have not been seen before, and maybe they finally have to let Batman out because there's a guy who starts setting off bombs around Gotham City and leaving riddles at every crime scene!!

Last Son on Jun 27, 2009

And this is precisely why you're not a writer.

Are you kidding? on Jun 27, 2009

That was a brilliant article. Though the darkness and the shackling ending would be beautiful, I don't think that many people would like that right now. An ending like that to a *saga* of Nolan would be a most remarkable moment in cinema, and I think many of us are craving for a Batman-Special sort of "villain of the week" type couple of movies just so we can experience as much as we can of this heart pounding and breaking series before it would become to end with a Frank Miller "Dark Knight Returns"-like resurrection. And actors like Johnny Depp (Riddler), Helena Botham Carter (Catwoman), and Philip Seymour Hoffman (Penguin) would be able to fill these spots in an epic saga that we would remember for the rest of our lives. Call it fantasy or over-the-top, but it would be a more edgy and haunting tribute to the Batman figure in history more than any other version. I think that would suite the most complex comic figure of all time with a taste of the many "masks" of Batman annually like a great series becoming a even better graphic novel when it would end like the "bang" you just beautifully described. This would be able to pay homage to the Batman fans that have followed him through the millions of stories that make up the story of the Batman figure.

I would describe a dark and gothic Savior or Christ (don't get scared people) journey till the most dramatic resurrection in a six-part saga. I think the three movies in-between TDK and the resurrection you would want. I'll try to quickly pitch a image of this saga with early designs for titles that would be the themes to honoring and exploring Batman like no other story before.

I. Batman Begins (The Infancy or origin) Sacrcrow/Rauls
II. The Dark Knight (Fall into madness) Joker/Two Face
III. "Masquerade" (Identity and Renewing of the Vow) Riddler, Tagline: "Who is He?"
IV. "No Man's Land" (No jurisdiction) Penguin/Hush, Tagline: "No where to run."
V. "Crucifix" (The Price of Love/Fate) Catwoman, Tagline: "Love Bites"
VI. The Dark Knight Returns (Resurrection), Joker Returns, Tagline: "Tagline like yours"

Of course this is a very rough draft, but I think that through a captivating and expansive story line to venture into every deep dark side of the Bat's soul is what we are looking for in this amazing series of cinema. I would really love to see a real dark and edgy tribute to the Batman world of comics through the tools they used to create Begins' and TDK. And the ending could be literally just like you explained in the styleof the Nolan Bat-franchise like we have seen in the last two Bat movies. A series to put us all as citizens of Gotham in another lifetime of great movies is what I believe that Batman needs most, and Nolan is the one to give it to us, no one else, except for a few possible replacements like Zack Zynder.

Then again, it really is just imaginative thinking and almost literally impossible in the movie-world today for a saga of that multitude because it would be most difficult to pull off a blockbuster and a rewarding cinematic experience with the critics in the fashion of Nolan experiences. But in all, your situation and opinion is well-thought out and an excellent strategy for the continuation of the Bat Franchise. Probably, it is the most ethical solution to a now Bat franchise that is in jeopardy with all these rumors. But a saga, a series, a soap-opera-like twist-and-turn, exploration in the Bat psyche, is what we fell in love with Begins' and TDK, and I believe it is Nolan's right to follow through and fulfill his promise to create the Batman for the fans that have been experiencing Batman for almost a hundred years is what we want. An experience annually that would keep us crawling back for more like an amazing Saturday afternoon special, but leave us crying at the revelation at the end in the same fashion in the Nolan world that has been created with this new bat is what I crave and I hope some of you would agree.
That’s the Batman we need

Frank

Frank Saverino on Jun 27, 2009

Don't listen to the losers, Brandon…it takes guts to throw your idea out before the masses. Still, I have always wanted to see a film adaptation of Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns…

And keep Superman in it. After the last movie, the Big Blue Boyscout deserved to get his ass whooped….

Jakenstein on Jun 27, 2009

I think the whole idea is stupid. okay first of all if it is so many years later what is batman. An old man fighting through Gotham city. That can't happen. Also, Bringing the joker back might ruin the trilogy. Lisen if He came back his whole plan wouldn't work. At the end of The Dark Night we saw that the people in Gothem believed in Good and wanted to be at peace and wouldn't fall in to his destruction. This idea just wouldn't work. BUT, what I think the best idea for a new batman movie is this:

The Riddler is the main villian and he is a lot like the Joker… hungry for destruction.
No one can stop him he has shown Gothem how they were before Batman came he could do what ever he wanted and go anywhere and the cops wouldn't do anything. Because remember Gorden is still isn't sure about which cops to trust and who to trust so that could play in the part of the Riddlers role. So if they follow the Riddlers role he could cause more destruction then the joker did. This would be a great for Chris Nolan to direct because we saw how good he did in The Dark Knight. I think that he will follow in the Jokers foosteps. And batman will be afraid to go back because how he was so destructed by the death of Rachel and the guilt of the crime of Gothem from The Dark Knight. So I dont think he will be the first to act to the crime of the riddler. He will be convinced by alfred to do what is right. Also I think the movie will make a dynamic turn where either Alfred or Gorden will die in this movie. I think that would be a great part because when rachel died no one expected it to happen but that made the movie that much better. I also think that they should keep away from the idea of the riddler in the first movie he featured in. I know Chris Nolan will be able to turn him in to this mad man type of person. Remember that it doesn't have to stick directly to the comics. He could turn it into ANYTHING. I also think that Batman will have to save the city not only because thats what he is supposed to do but because he took the blame for the murders that Harvey Dent did which made the city think of him as a criminal. And he must prove to Gothem that they don't have to fear him. And by doing this he will stop the riddler. They souldn';t have the riddler have a stupid idea to destroy the city like in the first one. He sould be equiped with things any criminal would have. Not just a pole and sending riddles all over the city. BUT they should definitly consider having his riddles be a clue to his next attack which means he sends a riddle and that tells what he is doing or where if the riddle is solved. But the whole movie shouldn't be based on them finding out an idea about a riddle. Batman will have to put everything in his power to be able to stop him.

jdesanct on Jun 27, 2009

This article was an ultimate FAIL!

We don't wanna see an old, retired, future Batman. That's not cool. We're not ready for an old Batman. We still want Bale. We want a kickass, intelligent, and dedicated Batman. Forget about the obstacle of Ledger's death prompting the casting of an older Joker…that's a foolish and immature way out of creating a story set in the future. No. Nolan and his bother are smart enough to work about it so that Bale can continue and end the trilogy.

You wasted your time writing that article, I hope it didn't take long.

Matt Suhu on Jun 27, 2009

where do you guys find the time to type all that shit? lol
anyways, i like the article and ideas
and the rest of you wanna be writers,
your ideas are pretty good too

bboy movie goer on Jun 27, 2009

don't let there be a trilogy, x-men and x-men 2 great, x3 suck. blade and blade 2 good, blade trinity suck, spider man was OK and spider man 2 was good, spider man 3 suck. do the math.

Darrin on Jun 27, 2009

god bless you sir! After reading that it gave me the lift that i needed. i hope that those guys listen to this message. After the whole passing of mj, man things were kinda sad. thank you for expressing your true feelings. it sounds like a masterpeice that has been brewing for a while.

Ray on Jun 27, 2009

Wow. I'm not a Batman fan whatsoever, but you made me wish I was. Nicely written. I was envisioning the film the entire read.

Mark on Jun 27, 2009

I think that a story is possible. They could possibly have the Riddler have been a local criminal that was trying to steal money for his dying wife and to keep his apartment from being seized by the bank but Batman stopped him and he went to jail and lost everything. Also, Batman threw a batarang at his legs, where he had to have metal bolts put in his legs and be walking around with his cane. So the Riddler would want revenge on Batman and is calling him out by kidnapping police and so forth and putting them in life or death traps, similiar to Saw, but they have to solve puzzles in order to survive. He could also be blowing up buildings to try and get Batman out of hiding so he can get his revenge and kill him. Also, Batman could be taking the loss of Rachael real hard and having become a drunk and down on himself, while trying to come to terms with the hero that he once was. Catwoman could be around as the hero trying to save Gotham in Batman's absence, following in Batman's footsteps but with a cat as her "symbol". Also,the Penguin could be a crime boss in the movie trying to take control of Gotham, since the other ones were killed off in the Dark Knight, but being called the Penguin, because he is fat and has a long nose. Also he could have another crime boss or possibly only a hitman, Mr Freeze, running around and causing destruction. But he would be called Mr. Freeze because he keeps the bodies of his victims in Freezers in a warehouse on meat hooks and so forth. Also the theme of this story could be redemption and the question of whether Batman can really be a hero for Gotham.

anonymous on Jun 27, 2009

ROFLMAO!!!

I was reading that and actually started getting into it. That Batman blogging guy is a horrible jerk. Worse than the main guy here *cough* but as I was saying. While reading, I fell into the articl and started thinking and visualizing these ideas…then I stopped. I scrolled to the top only to have my astonishment and shock wiped to realize, oh…once again this is not Alex.

Man I love reading your articles on here. You must write more…write everything!!! PLEASE!!!

w00t!!! on Jun 27, 2009

slow news day.

Fuelbot on Jun 27, 2009

Very well said. I like the idea a lot. It would be interesting to see Gotham in shambles.

imarapyeyermom on Jun 27, 2009

Brandon I thought your idea was great. Well done. The only thing I would add to it is Bruce becoming aware of his age with the death of Alfred and the (presumably) aged Lucius Fox Resulting in him bringing up a successor ala Batman Beyond. I think this would work with the time frame you set. If Mr. Nolan could work Terry McGinnis' storyline into the movie that would be terrific because the Batman Beyond series was so well- thought out. If followed through, this would perfectly create a completely different franchise while still being related to Mr. Nolan's terrific work on the original storyline. I would not expect Mr. Nolan to helm the new series as it would have a different feel from the original films. With it being so far into the future and the advanced technology the series would probably take on more of an action oriented feel while easing up on the seriousness and drama Mr. Nolan introduced. This would be perfect for an up-and-coming director that has the ability to juggle the action while not completely ditching the reflection of the protagonist's mental state. A director possibly capable of this doesn't come to mind but i wouldn't hand the series over to someone like Michael Bay. While I haven't seen a movie of his I didn't enjoy, I just don't think he would be able to reflect the shattered soul Mr. Nolan conveyed so well.

Mike on Jun 27, 2009

yea all these campy bad guys can be made out to be legit for a nolan-esque batman, add some realism like the penguins short and fat and wears a tux, catwoman just really likes cats, like the mr freeze idea #55

harrison on Jun 27, 2009

(warning: I am an actual screenwriter, so I don't mean to sound overly critical, I only mean to point out the obvious hurdles this idea presents in a film industry setting)

To suggest making that deep a leap into a future storyline would be the equivalent of simply rebooting the franchise completely - something the studio probably wouldn't do as all reboots are considered "high risk" by studio heads and hence are usually only green-lit if the franchise is very nearly dead.

Exactly how much time would have passed in Gotham? 5 years? 10? Put simply, people do not drastically change in appearance over that short of a time frame. It would have to be a larger amount of time to warrant an entirely new actor portraying Joker, no matter how much you made him look like Heath Ledger through CGI and makeup. Of course, moving any more than 10 years into the future means Christian Bale would have to undergo makeup to play an older Bruce Wayne, or be recast. Not likely. Batman 3 would need Bale to have a shot with the people in charge of the franchise's future.

While I think this is an excellent thought exercise and the plot does sound interesting, what the writer fails to take into account is the audience itself. Audiences are fickle, and no studio would risk losing their already-established fanbase by recasting the lead actors, removing a beloved character (like Cain's Alfred), or attempting a tricky plot device out of the blue. Recasting the Joker at all means that you will have certain members of the audience asking why the Joker looks different (no matter how many times you explain it to them because let's face it - certain audiences can be pretty dense at times).

And last but not least, the continued success of the franchise - your #1 factor when trying to get a movie made. Placing this story in the future means that the next film would have to be even further in the future, and so on… no one wants to see a geriatric Batman and let's face it - Batman Beyond isn't getting made until they've exhausted every other Batman story out there they possibly can. Nobody in the film industry would intentionally put their franchise in jeopardy by "skipping ahead".

If they do make a Batman 3 (and I really hope they do, but only if the story is right), they will just have to come to grips with the fact that their previous plans have been scrapped. The next movie will have to focus on another theme and bad guy than Joker, and will have to still tie into the previous two. Honestly, I would be happy if they just stopped making Batman movies. We've had two incredible films so far, and I wouldn't want to see it ruined with a sub-par third movie made simply because the studio needs another big payday.

Didn't we learn from the Star Wars Prequels? The Matrix Sequels? The Spiderman franchise? Better to leave good enough alone and stop while you're ahead. Sometimes more movies just means more chances to ruin the series.

Pete the Geek on Jun 27, 2009

wow..Batman 3 ..i cant wait .Must ….loll

led display on Jun 27, 2009

I could not read the entire article. PASS

richard on Jun 27, 2009

Do you ever get so bored when you're reading something online and your eyes slowly wander up around the Browser's borders, desperately looking for the possibility of escape? I TOTALLY did that just now.

richard on Jun 27, 2009

me again on Jun 27, 2009

Well…Batman is dead………….kind of. Never the less, Dick is now Batman but I always liked Azrael if they decided to run with that. This of course if the franchise continues which I wish they would stop with these set. Bond (20), Star Trek (10), and Rocky (6) ran very well with multiple movies, Bond being the longest of course, before they started over. Spider Man is entering its fourth film and if you count the Avengers together, you'll have at least 5 and more to come.

This is simply a wish though, that they run different stories, keep it going, and change it up. Heck, they could bring the Joker back in the 5th or 6th film like this. They have so many stories, I'd hate to see it stop, and I'd love to see Bale gone or lose the voice.

w00t!!! on Jun 27, 2009

Wow!
You have everything the next Batman NEEDS right down to the name! I have a fantastic urge to track down Chistopher Nolan's email and send this article right to him!

foxmulder32 on Jun 27, 2009

Get a life.

Tookiepoop on Jun 27, 2009

This was a great article with good writing.

I've also felt this series ought to be simply a trilogy. The first film shows the beginning, with a new idealism out to save the day. The second shows the ideal fall despite limited success, leaving the city worse off. A third film would have to show a new dawn of hope for the city and for Batman.

(Random question: Do you ever feel like Batman is really ineffective at fighting crime in a substantial way? Cuz Gotham just gets worse and worse, and he never seems capable of making it better, just beating up his rogues gallery over and over. If he was really successful, things would actually change.)

The idea of having a great deal of time pass for the third movie is an interesting one that reminds me, as others have noted, of The Dark Knight Returns. However, I'm not sure that's how I'd go if I were making it. I would probably go 5 or possibly 10 years into the future, but not decades. I think Batman ought to see his work make a difference much sooner than that. Old wounds must be sloughed off and new trust and hope must rise up, but it ought to happen sooner rather than later. I also don't like the idea of keeping The Joker as the villain. He's too distinctively Heath Ledger now, and if he's going to be in this universe he would just be played by another actor desperately trying to live up to the past. However, I could see a brief side role as an inmate in Arkham working, and a sense that The Joker's madness/chaos is still infecting the city in subtle ways could be quite interesting. Before I preferred the Penguin as the main villain, simply because I could see him clearly as a different sort of villain from The Joker, as well as one who could fit well in the realistic world of these films. I didn't want a retread of TDK. However, I could see The Riddler as a new villain who sort of takes up The Joker's mantle and continues some of the same themes several years in the future, forcing Batman to sort of take on a more public role again and find a way for the city to truly reject madness/chaos and look towards the future with a little genuine hope.

Hmmm, the more I think about it, the more I could see this idea working. I hope the Nolans read this and take a few of the opinions to heart, although they should of course take things in an entirely original direction.

scm1000 on Jun 28, 2009

The next one, if possible, should be based on one of the all time best graphic novels - Frank Miller's 'The Dark Knight returns'. The movie should stay faithful to that work, uncompromising in any way, not even succumbing to the ratings system. Box office, of course, might not react kindly, judging from the reception to 'Watchmen'.

Sesh on Jun 28, 2009

I get sick of hearing people's opinions of what should happen to Batman 3. If it happens let Nolan do what he wants. If not, then The Dark Knight is the conclusive end.

jules on Jun 28, 2009

I really like this idea, a lot. I feel like it could give this story a true ending. A continuation on the current theme just leaves it open for more sequels. Eventually we'll bore of them and we'll all be screaming for a franchise re-boot. The Dark Knight is to good of a movie to be remembered as a jewel in an otherwise mediocre trilogy.

Rob on Jun 28, 2009

I do love the idea, about the third part. You really wrote it out very good. For the joker part i'm afraid we cannot see a better joker then what Ledger did. To bad he's dead, cause he really did that role so fantastic.

I really hope they will keep this time line, and that they won't do cross-overs to start with their justice league plans, like marvel does for the avengers. Because at this moment i think it would ruin batman.

box3r on Jun 28, 2009

Brandon, that was amazing. At first I wanted to see more than three Batman movies in order to bring out more villains and to go into his story with more depth but you have completely persuaded me otherwise. Well done.

Tim on Jun 28, 2009

Why is it assumed that Heath Ledger was coming back as the Joker? I watched an interview with Nolan several months ago, and he said that he had never talked to Heath about returning! The end of the movie " we are destined to do this forever" only meant that, like in the comics the Joker will never really be gone, not that Heath was all signed on to do another one. Nolan was close to Ledger, he is grieving so its going to be a long wait before he is ready, if ever. Bale said that he is on contract for three movies, so another director may step in. When they do its best if they move on, have different villians. doing the Joker in any way,shape or form would mean instant death at the box office. In another 20yrs another actor can have a go at it. Why not bring in a brand new villian? Surprise us for once! Or how about Rachel? We never did see her body! or Two-face? they never actually said that he was dead? BTW if I hear Joseph Gordon Levitt's name again, I will puke. He is a great actor, but other than a simular face the comparison to Heath is just not there, its what 14yr old girls would come up with! Besides what is JGL going to do? use stilts? Lol! RIP Heath, my mate you are missed.

Kate L on Jun 28, 2009

Great, great idea! But…We need to think of our situation right now. Let us not go in that same old, same old Kingdom/Transformers/Salvation type of talkback. Nolan isn't your regular director, right? I mean, he's not some Snyder-like, ”I'm gonna give you all”, type of director. He's currently working on a movie called Inception, not Batman 3. What he needs is A REST. After Ledger, after two-three years of ”Gotham” (in any form), Nolan is the one who needs that TIME. May it be 5,6,7 years…He needs it, and he deserves it. He gave us this perfectly smart, GREAT MOVIE, that also happened to be a comic book-super hero type of movie. After Batman Begins, man, I was so full of that NAIVE HOPE that you so skillfully mentioned, I was thrilled (”He's gonna kick some serious Joker ass!” - that kind of stupidity), and TDK came, and Jesus…It entered my life without any indication of leaving it. Every single movie afterwards is now looked through the eyes of this one, and that's just sick. I love my TDK, I love Nolan and yes, I cannot wait for the third one…but…Three years gap beetween Begins and the sequel is ok by me (same thing applied for this one). Joker needs to be mentioned at least few times (he's in Arkham, madder than ever; a silhouette, perhaps? Few laughs?), and you need to give Batman a reason to do what he does the best, he needs to know that he's out there, his greatest enemy, even if he's locked ”forever” in a madhouse, Batman knows the truth – the day will come when they'll play their ”little game”-again. Also, with the third one being set in his now long rebuilt Mansion, beneath, in the darkness – techno equipped Bat-cave now his ”fortress of solitude”, his place of pain and memories…Batman needs to fight for his own life now. With police running wild for his life, he needs to be pushed beyond his darkest of nightmares – his identity needs to be compromised. Remember that line from Alfred (Begins): ”I suppose that secret identity of yours would be the one to keep your enemies far from your beloved ones?” (or something similar, you get it) -> Riddler (?) needs to find out his true identity and than play with it, play with Bruce's mind, his own playground now an Insomnia/Memento-like game. Gotham is not at stake (he will be, again, at the end, just to make sure that absolutely fucking everyone KNOWS The Batman is their only cure, their only HOPE), but the very mind of our hero. Can he take it? Can he continue? To further develop it, Bruce needs his new Rachel – HE NEEDS Catwoman, and not because she's cool/sexy (She is), not beacuse Nolan is the one for your regular mistakes (read: Spiderman 3, X-Men 3. etc.). Bruce needs Selina cause she's his Rachel, and Batman needs Catwoman cause she's an outsider, like him. Wayne needs to be emotionally on the level of John Connor (mind your own business, lame talkers, I'm thinking of Jonathan Nolan script level) – in TDK, Bruce was washed out in most of the scenes, completely silent, stressed. You need to push it of the fucking cliff this time…Also, let's be honest, is there a better person right now to play Selina than Marion Cotillard (she's in Public Enemies with Bale, she's in Inception – by Nolan! She's beatifull and, she can act – accent be damned!) Right now, I think that Michelle Pfeiffer's Catwoman is an even harder role to play, because, Heath pulled it in his own, outstanding way, and Nicholsons now seems like…”Ok, fine, but nothing special, ”Shining”-like”. Michelle was the one that brought ”something” to that role, just like Heath did. She's the crown jewel of Batman Returns, of pre-Begins era, and the real challenge to come. To end this one: At the end, after Batman finally RETURNS as the victor, as a HERO, we want our final KICK, Dark Knight want's it: JOKER HAS ESCAPED, He's there to continue this eternal fight, but not on screen, IN OUR MINDS…

Title? BATMAN ”Something”; Triumphant, Victorious…whatever.

P.S. Sorry, you can call my grammar – Croatia, Europe, thanks!

P.S.S. To simply put it: No Caine, no Batman

m4st4 on Jun 28, 2009

"The Batman" the name is simple but the way you introduced the idea of just this title gave me chills. awesome! im for it!

Timo on Jun 28, 2009

the next batman film should be directed by nolan could be fucking shit if it isn't,also they have to fit arkham asylum in it a bit more and a villain or villains that the genral public don't know like bane,killer croc or deadshot.you can put cameos from other villains such the penguin,cat women,the scarecrow & the riddler like in the cells of arkham.also maybe do a storyline that invovles robin becoming nightwing maybe showing deathstroke the terminator training robin to help on his way to becoming nightwing.could be pretty fucking cool.

zetsu on Jun 28, 2009

It sounds interesting to bring back the Joker this movie will be a lot darker than TDK and this is exactly what i was trying to say about other villains if they thought about bringing someone it should be from Batman's past it's not a villain's weekend to show off villains only but to give us a deeper view and perspective about Batman/Bruce Wayne and continuing what happened after TDK it doesn't have to be in a close time frame they could give it some time to make the audience feel how Gotham City has been without the caped crusade and with him being on the run from Justice, and how people see him as a criminal after him being framed.

I think this movie will be a lot serious than its predecessors.

Fisherr on Jun 28, 2009

That was a bloody good article.

I agree whole heatedly and I hope Christopher Nolan reads this.

Ed Stephens on Jun 28, 2009

some of you guys saying a recast of The Joker is a bad idea you guys are full of it when Heath Ledger was announce to play The Joker most or all of you on the net was up in arms saying not the actor from Brokeback playing The Joker.

if The Joker was intended to continue to Batman 3, Nolan should just recast someone to play The Joker or just have The Joker locked up in Arkham Asylum. Batman 3 should have Black Mask and The Riddler raging havoc in Gotham City.

Brandon your idea is abit too it sounds like another reboot and i doubt WB or anyone else want to see that.

Jazz on Jun 28, 2009

#60 - nice article, enjoyed that POV, specially for relating that premise (B3 in future) with the audiences and producers expectations!

Batman in the future is a good, nice, concept for a comic book, but that was already made more than 20 years ago, with Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns and DK2 - sorry, but no points here for originality.

For a film, it's a wrong, horrible idea, because it neglects one of the single important characters in the Batman: Gotham City. Taking the Batman franchise to the future implies ageing Gotham as well.

In Batman Begins, we saw a Fritz Lang's Metropolis-esque Gotham City, with monorails linking the skyscrapers above the ground, flooding the city with darkness (in more than a figuratively way).

But, in The Dark Knight Returns, Nolan choosed to make Gotham as close as possible to our real world, with most sequences in plain daylight (unlike all previous Batman movies), emptied of gothic accessories like gargoyles, churches and the goddman monorails - didn't anyone noticed how different Gotham was in just two movies, with no explanation of it ? Simply put, Nolan choose to have a plain and square city in TDK (in day and night), in contrast to a distracting dark city as in Proya's The Crow and The Dark City, or Batman Begins, so that he had more screen time to the characters (and we have plenty at that!), than making yet-another-sequence-of-flyby showing the city at night, gargoyles included. Gotham needed to be as neutral as possible, yet believable and real, like a normal city, and not one that could only exist in a comic book, like Tim Burton's Batmans.

And thus, Batman 3 in the future is a mistake as a movie, if one wants to focus the story in the characters instead of the surrounding environment, neglecting a city that most likely would become something like Batman Begins (again, bringing back the dark tone, the night shots… and the monorails) or Blade Runner, because future's technology, decades away from now, as Alex suggested, would surely have a lasting impact in the city. A city full of advertising screens (the price of those would be so cheap in the future that it would be _unreal_ not to cover entire buildings with advertising, in the future), holograms, one or another building with strange form and shape, futuristic car and clothes, not to mention new gadgets, is too distracting to a story based on characters.

Batman 3 can't happen in the far future, decades away from now.

…Unless one would focus in the Arkham Asylum instead of Gotham, leaving behind all the tech and gadgetry… but that would be too narrowed in terms of scope, compared to the epic scale of TDK.

Fox on Jun 28, 2009

Highlander 2, anyone?

Fox on Jun 28, 2009

FUCK NOLAN! It's better if he stops making movies a all. His Batman sucks big time, and how is Memento not better than piece of garbage that TDK is? You wrong.

2+2=4 on Jun 28, 2009

Complety agree with #82. Memento is 10 times better than TDK. TDK was just a moneymaking and entertaining movie. Memento was a true masterpiece.

Tyn on Jun 28, 2009

Why can't the 3rd Batman be the death of him? No matter how hard he tries, he can't avoid it and he ends up dead.

Corey on Jun 28, 2009

Brandon,
That was truly a great article. I loved every single bit of it. The only thing I don’t agree with is that it should be the third Nolan-Batman film.
The stretch between “The Dark Knight” and “The Batman” would be too long.

#36 SlashBeast.
Your comment was absolutely perfect. That is exactly what we need next.

Also let’s not forget that “Batman Begins” was Nolan's baby.
Batman films for Nolan are not just "his next film." Batman is something that he and people around him have always said is something Nolan truly believes in. The Dark Knight would not be half the great film it was if someone else would have made it.

So I would like to believe that Nolan would go further than just a 3rd or 4th Batman films, and why not? Why can’t someone like Nolan make more than 2 great films?
I understand that sequels in the past have been horrible. That’s what film history has shown us far more than we would like.
But I think that with Nolan's passion for the character of Batman, and his ability to create a great film, he can take Batman films further than anyone ever has.

…and I will go as far as to say that Nolan can introduce Robin further down (maybe 4th or 5th Batman film)… AND make him great.

Mr.Big on Jun 28, 2009

the only actor that can play an OLDER version of the joker is Daniel Day-Lewis… but i doubt he'll do it. cause he has so much respect for Heath that he'll avoid csting a shadow at his greatest performance…

the best performance of this Decade is Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight and DDL in There Will Be Blood… it's acting like in your face

Christopher C on Jun 28, 2009

Batman Begins was horrible. I hate that movie but I can at least appreciate The Dark Knight. Bale still ruins it but they split enough camera time you don't have to listen to Bale talk like he's some suffering from the flu. The whole Hong Kong didn't even have him talk. If Bale used that voice and talked as much as he did in the first one, couldn't stand this movie. Also when he interviews the Joker, at least it was all built up in suspense, his voice could be overlooked. I think Nolan took note of most people commenting on that after Batman Begins and did what he could.

Nolan is great, don't get me wrong, but they could pull in another director and who cares about Heath? I'm sorry but anyone could play that part really. Heck, everyone is excited about Levitt as Cobra, which is odd, anyone could do this. Also, why rip on MJ but no one cares Heath was a druggie, no better than other addicts except he has money to clean up and look good when need be, except when paparazzi follows him around.

But…a 3rd is not needed, at least not for awhile. Batmen movies are roughly three years apart so who know if they're kicking around something or have an idea and just keeping a closed lid on it.

I think Depp as Joker is good. Catwoman though should be left alone. Bring in someone else.

w00t!!! on Jun 28, 2009

The question is : What is The Dark Knight without Heath Ledger ?

Answer : Nothing !

Oliver on Jun 28, 2009

Come on ! Really ! just imagine it ! If Heath Ledger was not in the movie ! Dark Knight will be another bullshit !

Oliver on Jun 28, 2009

that was fucking awsome great idea man
it would be a great direction for the great director to take but I believe in Christopher Nolan and I believe what ever he does will be for the best thats whats good about him he dosent make a film just for the sake of making a film and turn out to be rubbish like spiderman 3 (I mean what the gip) he makes it because he feels that itll be as good or better than its preedicessor (or how ever its spelt)
but fo sho thats deffiently a great direction for the film

but ultimatly its in nolans hands

Joseph I'Anson on Jun 28, 2009

Personally, while I think this is a cool idea, now that I think about it Two-Face is the logical villian to be in the next one. Sure, he looked dead, but come it's the movies! We can bring him back somehow. Perhaps it only looked like he wasn't breathing, and I know the creators and Aaron Echart said that he's dead, but they can change their minds. Perhaps he was barely breathing where it was undetectable except by holding a mirror up to his mouth (which they didn't do). Or, he was dead but somehow gets brought back to life.

He was a really cool villian that we didn't quite get enough of, and I think he should be at least be one of the villians in the next one.

Dan Geer on Jun 28, 2009

Good ideas all around this. My only issue is that The Joker should not return, but be more of the flashback type escapades that you wrote about. In TDK the line "I believe we are destined to do this forever." surely hints at the fact that he would be a recurring villain but it's just not realistic. And Nolan's Batman films are about being somewhat real. So automatically you get rid of a lot of villains there. And yes it sounds bandwagonish but I believe if we are going to follow the two villain type casting Nolan has done (Batman Begins: Ra's al Ghul and The Scarecrow, TDK: The Joker and Two-Face) then let's get The Riddler in there along with maybe a lesser villain. Not Catwoman, not Mr. Freeze, not the Penguin, but someone who is very much so sinister like The Joker. Perhaps Red Hood(which was the original alias for The Joker) he has a very interesting backstory along with a way of dealing with criminals(he was also at one point Robin) that is beyond brutal.

Anyway I digress, it was a good article with brilliant ideas. But not perfect, fine tune it. 3.5/5

Movieraider321 on Jun 28, 2009

ur right
remember
things have to get worst before they get better

FrObOy21 on Jun 28, 2009

CGI joker (Heath Ledger) + Flashbacks from inside the prison who send villains to kill batman ?

Not a bad idea ha ?

Oliver on Jun 28, 2009

91, keep in mind that with so far Nolan's Batman films it is always 2 villains and so far one has died in each film. And it really seems that the one who does die, is the one we rarely hear about and don't get to explore much, but you really really want to. I loved Ra's al Ghul as a character and Liam Neeson did a good job portraying him. However I didn't get the desired dosage I need of him. In TDK the same applies. Love Two Face, Eckheart was brilliant, but didn't get nearly all that is him. And as much as we wish he would come back, logically there is no actual way to do it. Nolan loves to keep the realism in the films so to bring Two Face back would take you out of that world. You would no longer feel like you are wrapped up in a story but instead watching Hollywood dribble. So imagine in the next film as I said in my comment(92) if we had The Riddler and Red Hood. Kill Red Hood, before you get to know who he truly is. Also I would just love for everyone in the audience to go "WHO'S RED HOOD?! THAT ISN'T A REAL VILLAIN!" Because I've talked to so many people and the only Batman villains that they think are "real" are the ones portrayed in the earlier films. And if we want to go that route(which we can since we are talking hypotheticals here) bring in Bane, he breaks Batman's spine, thus rendering him useless. Don't end this film on a high note, make sure it is still dark and gritty. Batman has his spine broken, and realizes that while he can no longer fight against crime his symbol will stay. So more of a bitter sweet ending if anything. If they do bring Bane back, don't make him so fucking cartoony, they ruined him(as well as Freeze and Poison Ivy). Again, my rant is over.

Movieraider321 on Jun 28, 2009

Movieboy #32– regarding your comparison with how Harry Potter had to recast for Dumbledore imo is much different. When Michael Gambon took over for Richard Harris due to his passing (RIP), you can’t say Michael blew away the audience and stole the show. So it isn’t like life was back to normal. In this case I feel it will be lose / lose situation for everyone.

I truly think that Nolan isn’t going to come back. I believe with the passing of Ledger (RIP) it threw a massive curve ball and now Nolan’s plans for the 3rd were screwed up in every way. Nolan probably had this great, rocking idea for a finish. You can tell Nolan had plans for Ledger to continue. If the Joker is used IMO perhaps with technology these days they can make Ledger / Joker CGI, reverse the idea of Joker being the main and having him as a supporting role. Plus (correct me if I’m wrong) but I read WB/DC wanted to start following in MARVELS steps and start crossing over character’s so a JLA can start circulating this is why Nolan after the TDK he was quoted that his Batman and Gotham isn’t meant and wouldn’t work for that. With the studio and director bumping heads, egos will arise and at the end the studio will win.

Regarding the article, well done but I only think a time difference of 6 months – 1 year will work out. If you want to throw in flashbacks of a few villains fine if done right but leap jumping years will make a feel like some type of corny cop out and reboot.

The outcome will be interesting to say the least, only time will tell.

Blue & Orange NY on Jun 28, 2009

100

YAWN. Wake me when Nolan tells us _his_ story ideas. Otherwise, shouldn't fan fiction go elsewhere?

Seriously? on Jun 28, 2009

101

BAtman 3 should be called Gotham City………… Its about the people, so why not call it after their city….

and yeah, time will fuck it up, i agree with 60…..

and Alfred will live…

NIce on Jun 28, 2009

102

you touched my soul.

REALLY good writing

mrmr on Jun 28, 2009

103

IT's CLEAR that WB is stuck between a rock and a hard place. The temptation for the studio to want to bring the Joker back must be great. It would guartantee huge box-office again.

Chuck

entertainmenttodayandbeyond.com on Jun 28, 2009

104

@ #96 Blue & Orange NY

you got to remember The Joker is just an character so anyone can play him no matter what if The Joker meant to be in the next movie why not recast . i remember before Ledger was casted as The Joker everyone was on a uproar about Ledger playing The Joker and since he prove he played a amazing Joker people changed their opinion about him. if The Joker meant to be in the next movie why not recast someone whos willing to play The Joker no one is taking away Heath Ledger performance as The Joker but if the character is meant to be in Batman 3 why not take the risk to cast someone else for The Joker role.

remember life has to go on for The Joker if he had to be in Batman 3 or any other future Batman movie someone else will have to play The Clown Prince of Crime. we should not have Heath Ledger death stop The Joker to carry on causing trouble and mayhem in Gotham City. i dont think that Heath Ledger will be upset someone else be recast to play The Joker most likely he hope Nolan and crew can carry on with Batman 3 with a good story and action. we all know that trilogies are the most difficult or impossible thing to do cause always the 3rd movie end up failing.

movieboy on Jun 28, 2009

105

They should bring back Bane! I want to see Batman fight someone who can kick his ass a little. They make him to tough.

Mike on Jun 28, 2009

106

i agree with your take on the 3'ds title. in fact i think its pretty brilliant.

I also completely understand where you're coming from and love the idea. But i do not ever expect to see your take on Bat3 in theaters. As others have said, i doubt that the public will accept another joker change, no matter the reasons behind the change.

I think the third will be a focus on Gotham's Crime syndicates. With Heaths Death i think this cities version of the joker dies with him. But The Joker hurt more then the cities hero's he also hurt the hell out of its mobs and syndicates… I Say bring in the Penguin and make him here to Unite the mobs, and try to take the place of Harvey Dent in the eyes of the people… now I'm not talking the wattling, slippery, live in the sewers penguin from batman returns, But a new take on the character just as they did with the joker. I think it should Focus on Penguin taking over the mobs, Harvey Dent coming back and joining his side (remember Harvey Dent is dead, with his reserection he is now 2face) and tie this in with Scarecrow and his drug ring (since its been a small-ish thing in both films thus far). Keep 2face in the shadows, and place him making a pact with the penguin to run the underground as he runs the city topside. Have them promise Scarecrow some sort of power in use of his financial gain through his drug ring. Have 2face plotting to overthrow The Penguin for full power over what he calls "his city". Have Penguin take control of the city and its people with a very anti Batman message. We now have Batman as the cities villain trying to stop this cities new savior (the penguin) after killing there last making him even more hated.. He is also trying to stop this huge new drug ring piecing together that its somehow related to the Penguin and with the final surprise that Harvey (2face) is sill alive wanting to kill batman him self with the ultimate goal of running both this cities dark side, and this cities light side. you have batman capture the scarecrow as always, have 2face betray and kill the Penguin and end with batman defeating and arresting 2face, in front of all the people non the less so he will be forgiven for the death of Harvey Dent and the attacks on The Penguin and will have fallowed his No kill rule to the very end. showing his city that he is there hero even when they all turn against him he is only here for there better interest.

how much you wanna bet that's what happens in the third movie?

DoomCanoe on Jun 28, 2009

107

oh also… no riddler. the only way it could be done is with batman solving a problem that leads him to another problem which he solves that leads him to another problem ect. till the end of the movie

it will be like Die hard 3 if you make it about the riddler.

NO RIDDLER

DoomCanoe on Jun 28, 2009

108

i stopped reading these comments after the first 4 or so

HAHA @ EVERYONE

real talk on Jun 28, 2009

109

good article, i totally agree

tom eck on Jun 28, 2009

110

I have read A LOT of possible Batman 3 treatments and had a lot of conversations with people about where it could go villain-wise. Nothing I have heard sounded right at all. Even in my own ideas there seemed to be no finality to it. There was what could be dark, brooding and cool as hell compared to most of the other Batman movies before Begins, but it never seemed to have a chance to be as good or better than TDK. It's unfortunate that no characters introduced could compare to Ledger's MONUMENTAL performance. The movie done with Riddler, Catwoman, The Penguin or any other villain would be a pointless step backwards and make little sense.

That said, this is the first treatment I've read/heard that intrigues the shit out of me. I can picture it really working and has that finality that this story arc needs. It does remind me of Dark Knight Returns but it works for me. Though, I don't really think it's necessary to bring back the Joker at all. And if you must, I always thought it would be better for him to serve as a kind of Hannibal Lecter like character playing his games from the confines of prison. Serving as more of a background character rather than a full-fledged villain. Batman could consult with him in order to defeat a larger threat that the Joker may be secretly controlling. Though I think it would be better if he wasn't. Either way, I think the threat could be a villain we've never really seen before or at least one that isn't well known at all. It's kind-of what worked with Begins. Rhas-Al_Ghul wasn't a normal villain and it made the movie more interesting.

So well done and I hope they go in this direction for the next one, otherwise I say don't even bother. My hope is that somehow Nolan will see this idea and give it some consideration.

Dane on Jun 28, 2009

111

Very much AGREED.

As I read the article, I was thinking of the Graphic Novel, The Dark Knight Returns.

It's a great idea, evloving Batman to the point of 45 or 50 years old, when he would be saying inwardly that he is getting too old for this dance.

And I will also say that if we have to include the Joker in the film, he could likely be played by Brad Dourif (Wormtongue from Lord Of The Rings). He would be awesome in that role and he would absolutely deliver the depth and color and genius and crazy that Heath masterfully created without dropping the role into parody and tedious repetition.

Nevertheless, if Mr. Nolan does decide to return for a third look at Batman, this notion of studying future Batman's redemption is a great story to tell. And like most, I would want Mr. Nolan to tell it.

Nimblewood on Jun 28, 2009

112

THE BATMAN

That is the best title. Simple.

But, if Nolan does come back, you know it is going to be something none of us are expecting.

Algoresnuts on Jun 28, 2009

113

here is just a few idea's 1.getting some crossover films on the go just like marvel are doing with the avengers but these lead into a justice league film. 2.robin becomes nightwing 3.bane & killer croc 4.frank millers the dark knight returns 5.batman vs superman.

zetsu on Jun 28, 2009

114

Brandon, that was one fantastic article. You and Nolan should collaborate on THE BATMAN. Keep writing dude, because you have a brilliant future ahead of you.
Look forward to your next article!

Pops on Jun 28, 2009

115

Great writing Brandon! Inspiring way to start my day! You got everyone stirred up! Aloha

Cindy on Jun 28, 2009

116

A few things …

To complete the story arc that began in TDK you can't jump into the future. Going years into the future is kind of a cop out and it wholly unrealistic. Remember, Nolan wanted his movies to be based more in reality than the Burton/Schumacher movies. Nolan's Batman is one that does not leave loose ends for years. He resolves things quickly and that is what the next movie will be about. Yes, transcendence does not need to take 3 days, but calling for a gap of decades is preposterous. If you do that you may as well re-cast everyone.

Secondly, The Joker doesn't have to be gone. He could sit this next movie out (I'm personally hoping for more than three movies) and everyone will assume he's in Arkham or in prison or in hiding. This would be the time to bring out more villains and bring them into a more contemporary context (the way Nolan knows how to do best). My vote is for the Penguin character to be introduced, not as a disfigured hermit (a la Danny DeVito) but as a portly corrupt businessman who is best on getting the upper hand through many illegal dealings. At the end ift could come out he was inspired (or whatever) by The Joker and allude to a fourth movie where the arc could end. Which brings me to my next point …

Re-cast The Joker is inevitable. Yes, they will do this dance forever and it's not fair to the cannon of Batman that The Joker should die with Heath. I've said it before and I'll say it again: Joaquin Phoenix would make a great Joker (I know all that "retired from the movies" hoo-ha is out there but I don't think he would pass up filling shoes like that). You cannot resolve anything if The Joker is completely out of the game. I'm sure Heath wouldn't want things to end with him just as Jack Nicholson wouldn't want the character to end with him. There will always be someone else to fill the role that MUST be filled (just not with Shia LaBeuf).

As for everything else, time will not solve anything. Getting rid of Alfred is a terrible idea because he's Batman's conscience (Lucius Fox is an enabler and a friend, not the same caliber of influence on Bruce as Alfred will/can be). Yes, time will pass between TDK and the next movie, but putting it way in the future is just a way to run from a problem instead of thinking it through and fixing it.

And Batman is all about fixing problems.

Sean D. on Jun 28, 2009

117

okay and back to the speculation on the line of "We are destined to do this forever" I really honestly and truly doubt the next Batman movie would have The Joker as the main villain, maybe a hint on his activities once in awhile but that line was mainly a throw back to the comic days where The Joker was the villain, he was the epitimy of madness and he and Batman had a rule, never to kill his villains. That is what he meant by that line. If Nolan had thrown in The Joker again I think the movie would have been wasted to be frank. For example while I was not a fan of The Scarecrow as a villain anyway the way they do a callback to him in the beginning of TDK was very good. They could do that with The Joker, remind us that he is still around causing havock, but not be the source of the sinister plot.

Movieraider321 on Jun 28, 2009

118

Oh and Sean D. has made the most sense in this discussion, kudos to you friend. Not my choice of villains but it all works out I guess.

Movieraider321 on Jun 28, 2009

119

Okay and everyone needs to read The Man who Broke the Bat..brilliant work, and shows how Bane was supposed to be. He would make a cool villain, while his abnoral strength isn't exactly realistic, steroids do the same thing. So easy explanation "Venom laced steroids".

Movieraider321 on Jun 28, 2009

120

"m4st4 ", I agree with you! Batman without the Joker is empty because they "complete each other". How can one understand a concept without seeing the opposite of it? How can one comprehend the day without the night, or the good without the bad? (pardon the literature student). One cannot completely understand the depth of Batman without the Joker, and Heath Ledger was and is and will always be the Joker and recasting him is just plain stupid. I read something above about making it like Hannibal Lecter, who is the main villain and is rather seen as a minor character. Make Joker stay behind bars and put him in a few scenes using some footage of Heath (there should be some they can use, right?). Add the Riddler as the main villain, or one of the main villains together with the Catwoman. Avoid the other villains with supernatural powers (such as Mr.Freeze, the Penguin, Bane, Poison Ivy, etc) because the best thing about Batman is that he is a hero without the supernatural powers unlike many other comicbook heroes, and that is exactly what Nolan was trying to do with his Batman. (And when adding Catwoman, don't add the stupid stuff about her being brought back to life by cats). And also avoid Robin at any cost. Also, since Joker is going to be in the asylum, add Harley Quinn who tries to find out the real identity of Batman. And since the "trilogy" begins in "Batman Begins", and goes to its peak in TDK, make the third (hopefully) one as the end and make it something like Batman Ends (why not?).
BTW, nice article, but I wouldn't go for the whole "skip decades". A few years will be okay (3-5), but decades won't do any justice to the Batman Nolan created and Bale portrayed.

F.C. on Jun 28, 2009

121

Thanks for the article. From a big fan of Batman, I thought the idea was good. First, there has to be a third movie. People can say it’s a risk, but if writers would just stop and not try to do too much and just make a movie that the people (the audience who are paying hard earned money) want to see, then it has the possibility of being one of the greatest trilogies of all time, unlike some of the others (that seemed like they were made to just make money). There has to be a break between where this movie ends and the next begins (and I do hope Nolan makes another) in order to fully understand how much pain Bruce Wayne has accrued from The Dark Knight story line. I do not believe the Joker is an option. As much as I would love to see that character again, I would not want to give any actor the task of trying to live-up too the performance that Heath Ledger put on, whether he looks and/or acts different or not. The story does need to have a resurrection type mentality though. The death of Rachel, of Harvey, the death of Alfred, the aging of Fox with a struggling Wayne Enterprises, the apparent loneliness of a millionaire not able to find love or comfort from a true friend, etc., could all be factored into a Bruce Wayne/Batman that is willing to give it all up and let Gotham go down in destruction. Then something occurs, Hope. Hope could be installed in a character (love interest) or just blessed from above and Batman is confronted with a tyrant (the Riddler) and has to act. This completes what will be one of the greatest trilogies of all time. And hopefully, the Batman legacy will end on a positive instead of movies like Spiderman, X Men, The Matrix, and so on.

richardt on Jun 28, 2009

122

this article makes billington look like a slobbering retard. extremely well written

mos on Jun 28, 2009

123

#108… good casting with Brad Dourif.

i dig it

DoomCanoe on Jun 28, 2009

124

Johnny Depp should be The Joker

Mace on Jun 28, 2009

125

my cast for Batman 3

Guy Pearce or Crispin Glover as The Riddler
Johnny Depp as The Joker
Timothy Olyphant as The Black Mask

Mace on Jun 28, 2009

126

In reference to #124, I was just thinking that also. Johnny Depp, with makeup, can put on a performance that is eerily similar to Heath Ledger's. Johnny's got the acting ability and I believe he's capable of doing the Joker's voice.

John Doe on Jun 28, 2009

127

Ok your ideas are good but to say the series needs a final chapter is completely false. The Dark Knight was something that cannot and will not be topped if attempted. Why not just let it go? It is so much more haunting if we just keep it in our memories instead of trying to force a conclusion onto it all. to be honest I wouldn't even want Heath Ledger in the third film because then whatever he would do would become a gimmick. Let it go people and enjoy what you have. Everything has so much more weight when it is all the more mysterious………….morons

David on Jun 28, 2009

128

I think it's important that Nolan saves the Robin and Catwoman characters. He needs to fully convince us that if there is to be a Robin or Catwoman, they will be completely reborn and cast in a new light.

So much so, that even Christian Bale would be convinced about Robin.

LW on Jun 28, 2009

129

SAVE THE MONEY!!!…dont waste $$$ on a project that is dead in the water before it even gets a cast and a script…this one aint gonna fly…..period…from here it will sink to the level of the old TV show…BIFF….BAM…WHAP….

moldybread on Jun 28, 2009

130

Sweet article Alex. Check these ideas out:

I have had these crazy ideas that have been rambling around in my head about Batman 3. One has been in there even before TDK even came out and the other just came to me when I watched a completely different film.

My first idea came to me when I was reading Frank Miller's 'The Dark Knight Returns'. For those of you who aren't famliar with this comic, this four part series takes place 10 years into the future. Gotham City has literally become a war zone that has been ravaged by a sadistic and ruthless gang called the Mutants. Bruce Wayne is now pushing 50 and has become an empty shell of a man. He hasn't donned the cape and cowl for a decade and has become an alcoholic. He has tried to resist the temptation of going back to his old ways, but he ultimately gives in to his inner demons. As soon as he dons his legendary persona, Batman then begins his mission to destroy the Mutants and give Gotham back to the people.

I think that both Christopher and Johnathan Nolan, David Goyer, and Christian Bale should wait at least 10 or 15 years and make a movie out of this comic. I just think the story and the way Miller wrote it is phenomenal and would make one hell of a movie. It would be great to see if Bale could pull off the role both physical and mentally at like age 50. Considering how compelling the story was and how mind blowing the action sequences were in TDK, this could be a gigantic and immensely entertaining film (if done right of course.) There is a storyline that involves Superman, but I think they should leave that out. But what they should leave in is storylines that involve both the Joker and Two Face. Although, I think the whole film should just concentrate on Batman's battle with the Mutants.

The other idea that came to me deals with who would replace the Joker, provided that they want to bring the character back for 'The Batman' (seriously, good title man). After watching the remake of the classic thriller 'Sleuth', I feel that the best replacement for the role would be Jude Law. After watching his mezmerising performance in that film, I am convinced he is the right man for the job. As I watched him in this role, I could see little ticks and mannerisms that really looked Jokerish. Plus, he did portray a very convincing and vile killer in 'Road to Perdition'. I am well aware that a lot of people will dispute for making this suggestion, but I would like to point out that there were people who didn't like the idea of Ledger being cast. I am pretty sure now that those people are eating crow as we speak.

Another actor I had in mind for this role was the great Daniel-Day Lewis. Whatever darkness or insanity that Ledger brought to the Joker, Day-Lewis performance would most certainly give the next film an R rating without question. He would truly bring that character to the seventh circle of Hell. Although, I am turned off by the idea because of his age (he's in his 50s). I think the Joker should be at least in his early or mid 30's.

Out of all the ideas I have shared with you, I would most definitely like to see 'The Dark Knight Returns' become a reality. I think the film, if done correctly, would be 5 times more darker and intense than TDK (though that is a tall order). Welp, that's about it. Thanks for listenin', Alex.

Thomas Wayne on Jun 28, 2009

131

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOPPPPSSSSSS!!!! Brandon I am so sorry. I totally did not read the 'by'!!! SSHIIIIIIITTTTTTT!!! Again, my apologies.

Thomas Wayne on Jun 28, 2009

132

I'd love to see another Batman film from Nolan; but there is a poetic beauty to how The Dark Knight ends, with Gordon saying that line, "The Dark Knight". As much as I want Nolan to make another one, if he doesn't I can live, with The Dark Knight being the last film. The problem is that Warner Bros. is not likely to shelve a property that is so potentially lucrative. If Nolan is out, I'm afraid we'll end up with something that more closely resembles the terrible Schumacher films. I hope that never happens. I'd rather let it end with The Dark Knight than see it completely ruined, by an incompetent production.

I guess we can only wait, watch and hope for good news.

Dave Lister, JMC on Jun 28, 2009

133

I come to this site for news, not for speculations, ideas or some random dudes thesis on the next Batman movie.

I dunno…good peice but ultimately out of context for this site when there's real news, updates, trailers, and more to be had.

Voice of Reason on Jun 28, 2009

134

@133

Aye, well I use MSN Messenger to chat to friends. Doesn't mean I ever click on the 'games' or 'shopping' or 'news' buttons and then complain about them.

Point I'm making is… who cares what you come to this site for? If you don't want to read the article, no-one's forcing you.

Digital Metaphor on Jun 28, 2009

135

i agree with 133, for the first part

Voice of Reason 555 on Jun 28, 2009

136

I don't mind if Bale returns, but he's got to do something with his "Bat-voice" - it sounded ridiculous in TDK.

snickers on Jun 28, 2009

137

The main thing with this series is the sense of realism. Especially in terms of enemies.
Obviously trying to rewrite Mr. Freeze for this modern times feel would be to no avail, same as Poison Ivy, Clayface, Killer Croc, and some of the more sci-fish like villians. You can't bend the rules of science too far for this series or you lose the connection, they almost took it too far with the cellphone sonar in Dark Knight.
Now, I think you are right about the Resurrection theme, only thing is, you can't take it too far in the future or it becomes too disjunctioned for the common audience. There's too much speculation of what the world should be like and they've made a point in the film series that Gotham is a part of our world, being another city where crime rises and falls, unlike the cartoons or most of the comics where Gotham is practically treated as a City-State that the world revolves around. And as we know things can change overnight let alone two years, even for someone such as Batman.
Now if they can rewrite the base of who the Joker is from being a sap who fell into a vat of chemicals that malformed him, and Ra's al Ghul as literally being an immortal, they can rewrite someone else while keeping the character of their role. Based on current circumstances, Gotham is now on the hunt for who is Batman and how to punish him for the death of Harvey Dent. It's been two years and no leads are made and Gordon is dragging his feet since he knows the truth, but results are wanted by those above him. Thus an outsider is brought in, Edward Nigma, a private investigator renown for his intellect and results, though his methods are unknown to the public. With recent inspiration of a "super-villain" role from the Joker, Nigma guises himself as The Riddler in order to lure the Dark Knight and gather information first hand to know the man. Only caring to solve the problem, he cares not for what tragedies occur or will occur due to his methods. Thus we could go several ways: 1. Batman redeems himself by removing a large threat to the city, restoring faith to at least some of its citizens. 2. After confrontation, Batman shows Riddler what the benefits to his role is and Nigma resigns from the case deeming it unsolvable. 3. kinda like 2, but a greater threat, such as The Penguin, Bane or some other villain(rewritten to fit the context), reveals what the Dark Knight's true role is to the city again and Nigma resigns seeing how important a symbol he is.

Matt on Jun 28, 2009

138

I love your idea for the next movie. What if they cast some one as the riddler and the story does take place in the future, the riddler could copy cat and dress up like the joker to mess with Batmans mind. To play off the anguish of the loss of Rachel and Dent. Then at the end Batman gets seriously wounded and he passes on the cowl to the next generation in Batman beyond. Maybe not the best, I don't right screenplays, but its an idea.

what-ifs? on Jun 28, 2009

139

Brandon great story, but this is the way I see it… Batman is in hiding till shit hits the fan because of this Riddler guy. He has to come out of hiding to face Gotham and his problems…Don't worry about bringing the Joker back, that is ABSURD! His legacy is cemented in the story perfectly. Throughout TDK the Joker was very philosophical in his approach to Batman "when the chips are down"…etc. When he made the statement "We are destined to do this forever." it wasn't literal. He was talking about Batman and him being the PERSONIFICATION of good and evil. someone can't do this "Forever". Bring in the Riddler (Depp) and make him a pupil of the Joker and more basass. Depp has the acting chops to pull it off and you have your catharsis of the Batman Trilogy. Have Batman overcome evil and put in the "Nolany undertones" and you have Batman Three or simply REDEMPTION. This is the only way to do it. Don't bring the Joker back. The Joker accomplished what he wanted, he became the symbol of what Batman is fighting.

Ajohn_4 on Jun 28, 2009

140

Awesome article, maybe it'd be cool to show him picking up Robin in the flashbacks and also him dying in the flashbacks……Batman 3 villians The Riddler as more of a Buffalo Bill character and The Joker as a Hannibal Lecter character……awesome

Seth Steele on Jun 29, 2009

141

a well written terrible idea. future batman without an albert character? without heath ledger as joker? not gonna happen.

allen sharpe on Jun 29, 2009

142

the batman hahahahaha nah uh oh wait lets call it Batman of Gotham hahahaha

werdnafaz on Jun 29, 2009

143

@134/Digital Metaphor Try not to be a jackass, my comment is just as valid as the next. While I'm impressed you dont click dumb ads elsewhere, my point is……"Latest News" is NOT "opinion."

This site has a reputation for sticking with the facts as best it can and providing news and valid movie info.
What if the next FS updates on Ghostbusters 3, Transformers 3, or any other movie, were just more lengthy essays from an unofficial sources giving detailing what a movie COULD be like? Keeping Hollywood connected with its audience hasn't consisted of such extended hypotheticals. This fantastic site's content is at stake if it follows this trend. The internet is littered with crap like this, I come to a site like this for a filter, and I'm pretty damn sure I'm not alone.

Voice of Reason on Jun 29, 2009

144

Agreed, I say gamble it all bring in Powers Boothe to play the older Batman & if not a Johhny Depp as the Joker than, GASP, Jack Nicholson to bring back a more faithful less silly Joker that could be the edgy performance he fell flat on in the over-hyped remake of The Departed.

Johnny Neat on Jun 29, 2009

145

I hate to be a jerk, but I think your idea is absolutely retarded. I think that movie would suck.
sorry

John on Jun 29, 2009

146

Chris Nolan did an excellent job directing the Dark Knight. It would be wonderful if he came back for a third film. One area however of the Dark Knight has never been explored, that of the "world's greatest detective". Rivaling Sherlock Holmes, Batman has always been the greatest detective of the modern age. Leaving the Joker behind (for it would always be under a comparison to Heath Ledger's performance) a re-envisioned Riddler would make an excellent third film.

Jeff on Jun 29, 2009

147

This is a great article. Some people don't see this movies as a complete story and that's also the problem with studio excecutives. If the box office is good theyll continue to make Batman movies no matter how crap the story goes.
So far, like you state, this has been a single story, pretty much like Lord of the Ring, and it has to have the ending it deserves from the guy who made it. Nolan have to be Tolkien, no one else.

Pablo on Jun 29, 2009

148

Alfred cannot die in the third film because he doent die in the comic book, you could have him mortally injured but he has to recover. Lucius Fox, after quitting Wayne enterprises gets killed, so he cant come back unless its for his death scene. there are however great story lines in the comic that can be explored in the films, such as, Thomas Wayne used to beat his wife and that Mrtha wayne cheated on him with alfred, so alfred could be Bruce's biological father. it is also premature to bring the Joker back in the very next film, you must give the audience something new. that they havent seen before. there are a million diffrent villians that can make an apperance in the 3rd Batman film, at last count it would be The Riddler, The Penguin and Catwoman. if they go with catwoman then they can play on the relationship that bruce has with Selina Kyle. so in conclusion, before you write an opinoninated article such as the one above rread the source materiel and know what your talkiing about.

Michael on Jun 29, 2009

149

First of all, Alfred cannot die, second, the Joker cannot come back as a different Joker, he would just be mentioned hopefully. The year/decades passing is a bad idea also. I think it would be a great idea to just be one year, when the batcave is built back up, and now there are going to be all sorts of freaks around the streets. The Riddler, comes as a criminal that is trying to find the identity of batman being obsessed, the penguin selling weapons to Rupert Thorne (the new Mob boss) and Black Mask working along side Rupert Thorne to overtake Gotham and bring the batman down. Batman then comes back as the Caped Crusader to defeat all the villains (except Rupert).

The Joker is mentioned on the news as the anchors say this is the worst threat against Gotham since The Joker.

I think it'll work out, Nolan just needs to get his Inception film done. I think Nolan told Warner Bros. "If you give me a film with unlimited budget that I can just make, then I'll make another Batman movie." I don't think he would leave the franchise out of no where. This is just the rumors.

Scarecrow on Jun 29, 2009

150

Nice article. Although, I was quite nervous when I read the title you were going to suggest the next villain be the Clock King…

Cracker on Jun 29, 2009

151

@ #146

The detective element WAS explored in The Dark Knight. However, that is one aspect of the character and I expect it to be more integral in a possible third movie but there is so much going on in the movies and in Batman's mythos that there isn't always time to explore singular aspects of such a complex character.

SlashBeast on Jun 29, 2009

152

The way it works is by NOT "seeing" the Joker: He HAS escaped. He IS on the loose. It's "part" of the "the crusade" that Batman is on. I agree that the story could be done via retrospective battles with other essential villians. But let us DO see that as the (past) effect of the Joker and the CURRENT INFLUENCE of his control now of the mob…"Tell your goons they work for ME now…" Even Harley Quinn a realtive recent addtion to the Batman universe would serve as the catalyst for the Joker's escape, pursuit and influence, though revealed in the climax. The ones Batman is battling ARE his operatives–that's "The Crusade"

Jean-Paul Valley on Jun 29, 2009

153

Sorry, One more thing: you know, Heath Ledger was Australian; he was imitating an American accent. My point–you could use a body double to see the Joker from behind, or in the dark and use an impersonator doing Heath Ledger (with an American accent)…until the conclusion.

Jean-Paul Valley on Jun 29, 2009

154

I say keep going with the series the way it is don't move it forward in time, maybe a story line like in the Batman:year two comics, the villain: The Reaper (think Terrance Stamp 20 years ago). Someone who is worse than how batman is currently viewed. Mention the joker is in Arkam and leave it at that for now. You can have the joker escape at the very end but not show his face. We won't actually see him again until the forth film. You figure it will be 4-6 years before we actually have to see someone other than Heath as the joker. Because lets face it you aren't going to find someone to do it better, it was perfect. You just need to find someone who doesn't screw it up by trying to imitate Heath too much. You have to have the joker to keep the batman franchise alive period. He is the only villain who is interesting enough to keep around for more than one film.

Vondoom88 on Jun 29, 2009

155

the joker is the the way the story must end. you can not end it any other way. i can see why Nolan would want to do this simply because he can end his series/ trilogy and walk away knowing he created something amazing. and letting someone else give us the in betweens. I did not think Heath ledger would do what he did on screen. He definitely brought back something in the joker most of us have been wanting to see in a long time. Not to mention really making that character. If this is the way the story goes there is no way you can complete it without using the joker. And if they do this fast track thing i would say the only way to really make this believable is by bringing in an entirely new cast. No Christian bale or anyone else we have seen. this will allow a new actor to give us the more scorned yet mature batman, and this will allow us to see a much more psychotic and vindictive joker. Who takes up these mantles well leave it to Nolan. he found potential in actors i would not think and they did it. When is comes down to it , this movie will be clack or white, you will love it or hate it.

splinter on Jun 29, 2009

156

Great article but moving the series into the future would blow the whole thing off course.
They should go more in depth into the city and what goes on without Batman always being there, how the crimes increase and new villains arise and possibly in the 4th film (if there is one) Bruce Wayne is having trouble being batman because of all the problems and its too much for just one person and tries to find a partner (bring in robin, not like the gay one from batman foreverand batman and robin), just like an ordinary citizen who looks up to batman and rides the streets of Gotham giving bruce the lowdown on whats going on. Thats my opinion on how it should go but again thats just my opinion

I also think the 3rd installments name should be simple, something like Gotham or if the riddler is in it something like Who Is The Batman?

shaler15 on Jun 29, 2009

157

no offense but that's a horrible idea. first off how can you say have years or decades go by. if you kill alfred then what makes you think fox would still be alive, you cant really age morgan freeman anymore, he already looks ancient. and another thing…people need to stop focusing on the joker, yes heath ledger did an amazing job, but batman has had great stories without him, so the point of altering whatever story there might already be just to fit in the flavor of the month villain (joker) is dumb founding to me. there are many other great villains that can easily be fit into nolans world for example: catwomen. dead shot. bane. talia al ghul. poison ivy. red hood. (and for those of you who say red hood is joker, well that's never been confirmed nor has any other joker past). victor zsasz. or hell even bring in the league of assassins set out to kill batman for the death of there once leader( as if ras could ever die) and that just names a small hand full of potential without the use of the joker. another thing i found wrong with your idea is the lack of authenticity. it doesn't really feel like a batman movie, hell replace batman with a former or still haunted cop in that story and it almost feels like the monstrosity max payne. well i feel like i'm rambling. oh and if you're going to bring in robin do it right. if one thing that has gripped so many people to this film is the fact that for once they're attempting to do right by the comics, not butcher their stories. ( i know it wasn't your idea for robin but someone who commented suggested that) . but i guess in the end all that really matters is the fact that at least this film has gotten people to once again appreciate the caped crusader. his stories are meant to inspire and spark just this kind of talk. and hopefully in the near future more info will be released on the presence of a third. oh and one last thing for the love of god they need to bring in vicki vale

johnb on Jun 29, 2009

158

To #157

But Vicki Vale is such a … err… "loose woman" in the comic, compared to the Vicki Vale potrayed by Kim Basinger. LOL!!

LW on Jun 29, 2009

159

i really dont think moving forward to the future in this series its a good idea
nolan's series are realistic
what u do in a sequel is what u left off in the previous film
batman as the dark knight,
a year is enough to take it off, batman is now the bad guy, so now batman has to face off gotham city, and this new crazy maniac known as the riddler.
i think robin would ruined everything, not for the film, but for bruce wayne, he has to face off the hole city, and now babysitt a teeneger, no way. he has to concentrate in his own problems. catwomen, i don't know because now bruce doesnt has no girl, and i think that angelina jolie would do a great sexy cat, but i don't know, something doesn't feels right to show her up
now, one of the greatest things for the third is that we now have wayne manor rebuilt and and the bat-cave, and who knows, maby licious has now built a new tumbler or somethin new, and realistic too.
what was great about tdk is that it showed everyone doing his buissness, like fox really helped batman in this one, and the mob doing buissnes with the joker, and how nolan mixed the story of harvey two-face with the joker, it was just amayzing.
that's how the third one should run.

gotham city

FrObOy21 on Jun 29, 2009

160

o and please, no penguin or black mask, those ARE UNREALISTC!!!!

FrObOy21 on Jun 29, 2009

161

Brandon Lee Tenney:

Who cares what you think the 3rd Batman should be. As if some how you have a say in it. What you have envisioned is wishful thinking on your part. Speculate all you want, but your article is a perfect example of why someone like yourself and others that have commented in this forum are strictly fans and not professional film makers. You let Chris Nolan and his team decide what comes next. As well as Warner Bros Marketing Dept. who always have the final say. Studio suits make the final decisions, that's how show Biz works. Sure, you can throw in your two cents worth, but until you have millions to burn, leave motion picture pre-production to the pros Fan Boy!

Jack Novelli on Jun 30, 2009

162

@FrObOy21

Black Mask is not unrealistic his a mob boss who wears a mask thats all

unrealisitc characters for Nolan Batman is people with powers and mutation i.e. Mr Freeze with his ice gun, Clayface is a mutant that shapeshift, Poison ivy who control plant

luke1 on Jun 30, 2009

163

Paul Giamatti as the older Joker…

Pablo on Jun 30, 2009

164

I'm just going to reiterate what others have said and give you mucho props on this article. Sounds like a solid screenplay to me…not only do I hope Nolan comes back to wrap up the trilogy, but I also hope he takes some of your thoughts into consideration:)

jep on Jun 30, 2009

165

I don't know. The franchise mongers might corner Nolen in to get it done sooner then later. I don’t mean to sound negative but The Dark Knight is going to be hard to top. I think The Dark Knight craze needs to die down before another Batman film can come out. Let the story age a little and give Nolen some time to work his magic. Can’t rush perfection.

Dustin on Jun 30, 2009

166

Nothing is set in stone! Why must everyone jump to conclusions? Personally, it doesnt seem logical for him to just jump ship now. Think about it, hes got Batmans character exactly where he wants him to be, the vigilante, the outcast. He spent 2 movies writing and directing it to set this up.

Sure losing Heath passing is a setback(and for the record…I believe The Joker died with Heath R.I.P) but theres other villians to go with in the next movie.

The amout of work Nolan puts into these Batman movies is alot, and can take a toll on anyone. He just needs a break, but hell be back.

The man is a genious, he knows what hes doing….I also wouldnt be suprised if all these rumors were just Hollywood propaganda (the man knows what hes doing )

Danny on Jun 30, 2009

167

Hopefully Chris Nolan and the cast of the dark knight will be back to make this movie…But i think the joker and the riddler should team up because they are similar characters and for the most part want the same things to happen…The only bad thing is that they are going to have a hard time replacing Heath Ledger…This series should continue on, it's very sad that Heath Ledger is gone but they can still continue to make great movies.

Sean Cox on Jun 30, 2009

168

dont feel like you can bring the joker back, at least for a couple movies. maybe bring in johnny depp as the riddler and maybe angelina jolie as catwoman

shaler15 on Jun 30, 2009

169

Ok, calm down now…

Go to Batman On Film-new BOF podcast, about this particular theme…AND LISTEN!!!

m4st4 on Jun 30, 2009

170

There are certainly great elements in Millers Dark knight returns but hopefully that will one day be done as a stand alone batman movie (Not just picked and dissected by different directors)!!!!

I think a third installment should avoid the joker all together!!
I think there would be a wave of masked criminals who would take their cue from the joker but just want to settle for their own hiests and more importantly large scale expressions of their own criminal conditions! The Joker represented the idea of terrorism and the question of morality in the face of desperation, a third installment needs to show us the dangers of where we are headed and the dangers of the actions we are taking all boiled down into the microcosm of the batman and gotham city! thats what has made these all work so far…

lando on Jun 30, 2009

171

Heres the thing, you say you want a Batman 3, BUT IN REALITY YOU LIKE THE FRANCHISE THE WAY IT IS, NOLAN MAY TOO. You can recast everyone and you still wouldnt get that feeling your looking for. Its that feeling of seeing something great for the first time, watching history be made, experiencing your first C-POP(im trying to keep it clean Alex).
You cant get that back and you know if they do this again you or anyone wont be happy, Youll want something better than TDK and you wont get it. That movie TDK was meant to be, I think there should be a 3rd film but i dont think its time. I say give it another year, see where Nolan is at and then move.
Going to the Future with the story would only indefinatly condem any other batman story to ever be made. You would almost do a Superman returns on it and it definatly would make you think. The seed of batman is planted in Gotham in Nolans Batman, but batman himself is not yet planted in who he is yet to jump to the future. He still is pulled in both diections if he is making the right choice. He needs to get lost in the mask for a bit in order to surface as what we know and love.

THERBLIG on Jul 1, 2009

172

@#157 "red hood. (and for those of you who say red hood is joker, well that's never been confirmed nor has any other joker past)"

"The Red Hood first appeared in Detective Comics #168 "The Man Behind the Red Hood" (February 1951). In the original continuity, the man later known as the Joker was a master criminal going by the alias of the Red Hood. His costume consisted of a large domed red helmet and a red cape. While attempting to rob a chemical plant, his men were dispatched and then he was suddenly cornered on a catwalk by Batman. Left with no alternatives, he dove into a catch basin for the chemicals and swam to freedom, surviving because of a special breathing apparatus built into the helmet. The toxins in the vat permanently disfigured him, turning his hair green, his skin white and his lips red. Upon discovering this, he went insane, and became the Joker."
-http://spider-bob.com/villains/dc/RedHoodI.htm

learn your shit

DoomCanoe on Jul 1, 2009

173

Some of you mentioned Jack coming back as the Joker! lol I don't think so. He would not fit in with the type of direction Nolan takes. Can't see it happening but I guess you never know.

great article but jumping that far into the future is too much like a reboot. stay away from anything that has to do with time in movies. it always causes problems.

No love for Josh Brolin as the Joker? Jim Carrey if he does not try to be funny. A serious character he needs to play to solidify his career. or did i forgot a movie he played a real serious dark role? Depp could do the Joker but he's getting too much hype right now so to me it doesn't feel right. Nolan likes DiCaprio right? and is now working with him on Inception so why not throw him in there to give it a shot as the Joker? We know he can be serious playing roles but dark? again not sure. these are some of the best actors right now and we question whether they can fill the shoes of Heath. that tells us something and might mean to just go another direction. either someone unknown or just the leave the character of the Joker out of the third movie.

longshot Joker: Worthington

james cameron on Jul 1, 2009

174

Three ways to wrap up this trilogy:

1.) Ewoks assisting Batman to take down the mob in a old school heart v. numbers battle.

2.) A pirate ship in the middle of the desert with a million crabs chasing Batman around.

or

3.) Kill The Batman.

NickPapa on Jul 1, 2009

175

Heres my idea, keep in mind I'm no professional screenwriter and am just a fan of the batman movies (TDK is my favourite movie ever) but heres just another log for the fire:
Batman is continuing to investigate crimes in Gotham and even though he is solving crimes and catching bad guys, the police are always trying to catch him. So you could open with him catching some crook and he hears the police cars outside, so he knocks him out and runs, the cops burst in and he's gone. All the while the riddler comes out of the woodwork as a criminal who wants to bring gotham to its knees in the wake of the jokers rampage and challenges anyone to stop him. He could leave riddles at the scenes of his attacks as to how he did it and where hes going next. Eventually Batman catches him and the public loves him again, he receives his redemption and the gotham universe is back in its rightful place. So my idea is basically the same, with just a slight variation on a lot of peoples ideas, but heres the cool part. It ends. Credits. After the credits we see a suave looking Christian Bale/Bruce Wayne entering the newly built wayne manor, Alfred by his side with all the lights off, alfred is carrying his bags and all the lights are off. Bruce flicks the light switch on and HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA is written all over the walls and you just know the joker is back on the loose somewhere and Batman has to go out there and catch him again. So you leave it at a Nolan/Bale trilogy and it would be pretty perfect. But again just my idea. Great Article by the way!

Jake on Jul 4, 2009

176

Daniel Day Lewis for the riddler - Imagine that!

Jake on Jul 4, 2009

177

Yes, I agree. Let's put Batman in a wheel chair and have him swooping around a nursing home in Gotham chasing his menace "The Joker". Thank you for bastardizing everything that Nolan has built up over the past few years and suggesting something that would completely ruin the story line. What would have happened if "The Empire Strikes Back" would have taken place many years after "A New Hope"? We would have forgotten Obi-Wan, Luke would have been much older, and The Emperor would be old and crippled. We need to remember Rachel and Dent, else-wise we will loose key elements of the story. This goes to show that any moron that still lives with his parents and hasn't been laid can create an internet blog site.

Andy on Jul 4, 2009

178

if they made a new batman and they did have the joker in it they should cast johnny depp because he cud actuallly pull it off thats just my opinion am not a huge fan of johnny depp fan but i seen a few films with him in and he takes the roles seriously he could do the joker justice and not sully the memory of the greatest joker so far played by heath ledger

paul clark on Jul 6, 2009

179

"An old man fighting through Gotham city. That can't happen"

So I'm guessing you've never read Dark Knight Returns huh?

Ska on Jul 6, 2009

180

I like this idea, minus the flashbacks. Gary Busey should play the old Joker. Being crazy ages you… or does it keep you from aging?

Jack on Jul 6, 2009

181

There is only one man who can play the Joker - Robert Downey Jr. He'd be much better than Ledger. Ledger was amazing at copying others characters - his Joker was an amalgam of Nicholson's Joker, Brandon Lee's The Crow (also killed while in character) BeetleJuice, played by Michael Keaton (Burton's Batman) and, perhaps more than the rest combined, Downey in the Singing Detective.

Ledger was a master copycat, Downey creates

Thanks

J

J on Jul 7, 2009

182

J

you're an idiot! Easiest decision I ever made.

Cat on Jul 7, 2009

183

Um… batman without alfred… you can't just decide to change the story completely… Alfred is a key character in all batman movies… the voice of Bruce's reason and almost his conscience.

Galla on Jul 7, 2009

184

I like the idea of set in the future. I never thought of flashbacks of how the batman defeated the other famous yet not so notoriously known villains in the series. If The Joker were brought back for the third and final film who would want to try to step in the shoes that Heath Ledger has provided? If that person does not do a job like we all expect the match up or exceed the caliber that Heath has done will we consider the movie a flop?
I like the idea of not having Alfred around. I like Micheal Caine but the character has been used too much in all the previous movies. Batman doesnt need a confidant. He just needs someone to talk to now and then to get all his thoughts off his mind and conscience.
If Robin is brought in the movie will definately be like the 1997 Batman & Robin movie which is for Children. Batman doesnt need any 'sidekicks'. Hopefully Detective Jim Gordon is still in the Batman 3 though he could take the place of Batman's Listening ear, and he doesnt even need to know his identity is Bruce Wayne. Or Jim can be brought in as the law enforcement ass kicking 'New Alfred'.

As a Batman fan for years I hope that Mr. Nolan does proceed with a final installment that will blow me away like he did with the dark knight.

RS$ on Jul 7, 2009

185

the ideas you have are interesting and could work but with alot of movie series the third movie always makes or brakes the whole thing so you have to be careful, in my opinion it would be a bad idea to ever bring the joker back but it is a great idea to pull the stroy decades into the future.

Samuel1323à on Jul 8, 2009

186

you're not getting it, alfred is as necessary to batman as his cape and cowl… his presence is not debatable. Without him batman isn't the same character… the story is COMPLETELY different. Kinda like Blade without Whistler.

Galla on Jul 8, 2009

187

FLASHBACKS !!!!! GET THE FUCK OUT

THIS ISNT SOME SHIT LIKE LOST.

fergal hunter on Jul 8, 2009

188

I love the skipping into the future idea and also believe the Joker is the consummate bat villain. As a lover of Jack's Joker, I was skeptical of Ledger's casting in TDK, but like everyone else was blown away by his performance. I despise the idea of the Riddler character, but love the Johnny Depp rumors. Recasting would be a difficult task and the actor would have quite the burden of proof on their shoulders. How could all of these factors work to an awesome end cap for Nolan… How about 10 or 15 years in the future with Depp in the recast as an older, darker, and truly insane Joker. If anyone has the star power and talent to follow Heath it would be Johnny. I also believe he has the moral character approach it from an immensely respectful manner. I know we don't like change, and that Ledger's death was a tragedy, but the Joker MUST LIVE ON! It is imperative to the Bat's mythos! Depp for Joker!!!! Kate Beckinsale as Catwoman; hey we know she's hot in black leather, see Underworld.

lupercus11 on Jul 8, 2009

189

However the Trilogy ends, it shouldn't be "The Last Acts of The Joker". As the Joker quips, he and the Bat are destined to face off '"orever" — the contest between them can never end, else the very Batman mythology itself falters. Let the Joker be felt in the background of Batman 3 as an ever-threatening menace hanging in the Gotham air like cordite following a shoot-out…but let Ledger's potrayal in TDKR stand as the last visible presence of the Joker in the Trilogy.

joe santus on Jul 8, 2009

190

First off if he throws flashbacks into the 3rd movie he mine as well call it cheating to fill the time card. If u didnt see the first 2 then how could u appreciate the 3rd. The 3rd shouldnt have anything to do with the joker until the end to play on to a fourth movie thats if the acting was worth a fourth film. It'll be hard to top Heaths performance in the Dark knight but with a great story line it will be possible. There were no flash backs in either of the first 2 besides bruce as a boy so y put any in the 3rd of previous already seen scenes??? I have faith in Nolan to pull another great movie out of his ass cause who ever thought Heath Ledger of all people would give the greatest perfomance ever by a super vilian just from his previous work?! You had to see it so if Nolan can find the actors, the 3rd movie should be even better. Thats only if they can give a great story line for Nolan to build off of!!!

GTstang89 on Jul 9, 2009

191

Never Kill Alfred!!! He hasnt been there long enough and where are all the words of wisdom going to come from? How is Bruce or Batman going to be able to handle the loss of Racheal and now alfred? Fox is just the great inventor and helper of batman but Alfred is there for Bruce when he comes home. No u cannot kill Alfred till Robin shows up or has another shoulder for support when things get rough

GTstang89 on Jul 9, 2009

192

now that sounds really good, i was going with the angle of introducing Harley and Joker's goons with Mr. J calling the shots via creepy phone messages and look a likes but never actually making any screen time

hearts4711 on Jul 10, 2009

193

Wow, if i plagurised a great graphic novel and then put my name on it i would be embarassed to have everyone commenting on it and praising my writing abillity or ideas, well then again I have this great idea, it goes like this. We have Batman take on a new villan.. I don't know let's say he covered in bandages and we'll call him HUSH and he torments Batman for a few months and Batman doesn't know whats going on, and maybe Superman will be under Poison Ivy's control and…….oh wait that was HUSH!!!! People should maybe know what they are talking about before they have an opinion, or even great praise for someone who didn't write……….he just recapted "The Dark Knight Returns" from 1986 and sorry to say there would be a Robin character…..worse yet it's a GIRL….oh no maybe try reading COMICS if you want to be taken seriously….. i know, i know, it's sounds funny comming from a comic nerd but hey……..to each his own!!!!!!

1badbat on Jul 11, 2009

194

In honor of Heath Ledger, I don't ever want to see the Joker again. He was perfect and I feel now belongs to Heath. What else needed to be covered about the Joker? We don't need an origin, Nolan understood that. We may see the effects of his work and possibly his influence behind the scenes, but if they try to do the Joker again I won't see this. The end of the film gave me the impression that his story was told and that he would never stop at the same time. Nolan isn't a one trick pony. I do like your take on the final installment, but please, let Joker stay golden.

D_FINCH on Jul 12, 2009

195

why so serious..

buooy on Jul 13, 2009

196

Liked the article, interesting ideas. Not original ideas since this is the entire storyline for the graphic novel "The Dark Knight Returns", you just left out Superman. But still a good idea I just don't think it's the best one for the 3rd Batman.

I do agree time is the key, but not decades. Maybe 2 to 3 years down the road max. And as much as I love the Joker he's not needed in the 3rd film. Leave him in Arkham and use some of the other villains. I have always thought it would be a great if the 3rd film went back and tied up some the loose threads from the 1st film such as the whole "League of Shadows" storyline. This is an organization that has toppled major civilizations for decades all the way back to ancient Rome so they're still out there somewhere. Bring them back, maybe make the Riddler or even Cat Woman apart of the League. I had always thought it would have been interesting if someone on the outside had sent the Joker to Gotham as a way of testing Batman before they themselves stepped in to the ring. A way of seeing just how far Batman could be pushed and what his weaknesses were, why not the Riddler? That would be right his alley. Also I have always liked the idea of Cat Woman as an international thief and Bruce Wayne's only equal in the female companion department. I hated Rachael with a passion. I want Bruce Wayne to have some love in his life. But over all good ideas but lets save this story for maybe 20 years from now.

Blueyes on Jul 14, 2009

197

One of the great things that Dark Knight did was to create a different take on the Joker (Glasgow smile) than the comics had. This could also work with the Riddler (see the Joker graphic novel by Brian Azzarello).
I believe that the third take on Batman should be about retribution. They need to show that a city like Gotham needs its Dark Knight.
There was a hint in the movie when Batman caped the new suit that "it should be fine against cats".
Also the fact that his love interest died, cleared the way for Cat woman to be introduced.

dARK_inSIDE on Jul 16, 2009

198

They could have fit the Riddler in perfect - if they would have picked the actor to play him the same time as TDK. The Riddler could have been the accounting guy - Reese - just could have had his name be E Nigma. On one of the Batman cartoons - the Riddler used to work for Wayne Corp - but was fired - part of the reason he decided to go into crime I believe. That would have tied them in perfectly.

StarCarlton on Jul 16, 2009

199

I like the idea of another Batman film. Put Nolan and Bale back and it's OK! The title… it shouldn't be The Batman. I don't know… anything else.
Heath Ledger was awsome as The Joker. A re-cast is a bad idea. A jump in time is a bad idea. I think another villan is the right thing to do. I prefere The Riddler.
Robin=another bad idea!

me on Jul 17, 2009

200

and #21 has it. who the fuck cares about chris nolan?! sure it was entertaining, and i'm glad rachael died, but he's not the end all be all to the Batman character. boo fucking hoo, your actor killed himself, get a new one. it happens. anyone notice the change in the oracle from the matrix?

that guy on Jul 17, 2009

201

#23 - Bravo! I could totally see Johnny Depp doing the role of The Riddler.

#175 - I like that idea of the lights being out and then when they get turned on HAHAHAHAHAHA is written all over the walls. I would think that it should be audible as well.

Ariel on Jul 17, 2009

202

i agree with #199 in that Robin would be a bad idea, that they should use The Riddler and he should be played by Johnny Depp, and that The Batman is a bad name… they would have to come up with something else even though if that's all I guess we could settle for it. Also, that they should most definitely make another film and that Chris Nolan should direct with Christian Bale as Batman( of course! ) The franchise does need an ending even they could even make a middle too( as a whole other movie… but only in our dreamz, it is only a trilogy… ) And I'm not really getting why the necessity of the jump in time but hey whatever, these people should know what they're doing and as long as it turns out as much of masterpiece as The Dark Knight, I for one will be pleased. ( Oh and I know a LOT of people don't agree but I am sad that Rachel died … :-[[[[ ) Oh well, you gotta let go sometime …

Fac on Jul 17, 2009

203

Also just that it is a very well written article ( well done! ) but that what you said about the ressurection …. mmhmm, that could be used in the title The Resurrection, The Returns, The End (actually that would work if he dies even though I hope he doesn't … ) I know its a stupid idea but The Batman… I just, I don't know it just doesn't have that feel of its the future, its the ressurection, his return to glory, it doesn't some up the End, the Finish, of such a great trilogy… they should just add to it … then again The Batman is not an all bad name but I think he deserves more…

Fac on Jul 17, 2009

204

I don't see why they can't just recast another actor as the Joker, and build into the character that the Joker is actually more than one guy. It adds a level of strangeness and mystery to it, and is sure to confound Batman, who would realize that this isn't the same guy under the makeup as before, but he can find no explanation for it. They pretty much have to address this if they recast The Joker, since it's common knowledge that Ledger was meant to play the part again. AND if they went this route, the new Joker could be distinct, and not have to be an impersonation of Heath Ledgers version.

Scott Reed on Jul 17, 2009

205

This article is basically the dark knight returns graphic novel lol.

In the future is a horrible idea.

Whoever said the third movie can be done without Nolan is a dope.

Cat on Jul 17, 2009

206

Did the author of this article even read Dark Knight Returns?

Scott Reed on Jul 17, 2009

207

Ledger was great as the Joker but keep him inside Arkham Asylam fro Batman 3. We csn see short clips of him wreck havoc in there. As far as Batman 3, Bring back Two-Face as an anti-hero who kills criminals and tries to compete with Batman aprehending criminals which eventually makes him bite off more than he can chew. Batman saves him and he saves Batman a couple of times but they don't see Eye to Eye being in each other's way. As far as villians go,we need a female nemesis Talia Al Ghul is the right one to use. Also Hush should be in this film and maybe his race should be changed to Black or someone more ethnic. Lastly The Riddler should be in this film portrayed by Jude Law. I think Johnny Depp is a great actor but he would characaturize The Riddler too much. Jude Law would bring a more dark and shadowy mysteriousness to The Riddler. Watch "Road To Perdition". He is also already wearing the derby hat in that movie and "Sherlock Holmes".

the kid on Jul 17, 2009

208

Sorry about the typos. The Penguin should have a small cameo as a Faclone's boss or something. Joe Poesci seems like he could do a great job as The Penguin as long as his character stays serious but with some dark comedy involved. How about Denzel Washington as Hush and a Morena Baccarin as Talia Al Ghul? Gotta bring back Two-Face though but not as a villian and not necessarily as a hero.

the kid on Jul 17, 2009

209

i loved the dark night heath ledger was amazing but i still think the joker should play a part in the next film if ever made… here is my idea………. the film should have batman on the run because of the ending of the last film but a new villain arrives causing more anarchy some one who doesnt care and wants to see batman dead and is willing to do wateva it takes some one more crazier than the joker…….. and they should recast the joker for scenes in arkham asylum maybe jonny depp i personally think he would make an amazing joker and not sully the memory of heath ledger.. and batman will be talking to the joker from arkham kinda like in silence of the lambs with hannibal lecter and clarice starling but more darker and twisted… and the joker will be trying to minipulate batman into killing the new villain totally messing with his head trying to destroy the batman….. just a thought really might sound crap to you all but i think batman should be made darker and more twisted as the story progresses if you remember the first comics batman killed people and used guns so not saying he should have guns but he should be taken down a darker path and go to any lengths to save gotham city by any means nessecary oh yeah the far into the future idea sucks. (bit like my idea) lol but we need the ending to our joker story and this could be it wat do you think people let me no(email is hotcrossbosch@hotmail.co.uk)

paul clark on Jul 18, 2009

210

I kinda hope Christopher Nolan reads this because I agree with a lot of what you are writing, but not all of it. Personally I want the movie to be called Gotham.

That Awesome Norwegian Guy on Jul 22, 2009

211

Batman Prevails or The Dark Knight Prevails it's a good title in my opinion. it's like Batman Begins, but now he Prevails against evil!

me on Jul 23, 2009

212

I have to say #211 ME, those titles I do not see becoming true…….the title will likely fall as RETURN OF THE DARK KNIGHT or Dark Knight Returns

Blue & Orange NY on Jul 23, 2009

213

#212, Return Of The Dark Knight or Dark Knight Returns(especially this one) are good titles, but they sound to much like Batman Returns (1992 film). I think Christoper Nolan wants to be original.
Even I, like you said, can't imagine a movie named Dark Knight Prevails, but is at least unique(i think). It doesn't matter so much, I just want to see another Batman movie because he is my fovourite superhero. Like #210 suggested, it could be Gotham(the title) or, why not, simply Batman 3. Anything but The Batman.

me on Jul 23, 2009

214

OK.. …..Lets give MR.BRANDON LEE TENNEY A round of applause for a nice and very detailing ……STORY!!!!
NOW how the third installment should be writtin is not in the future and do u now why …bet u dont ..well ill tell all u low lifes (quate from bruce wayne in batman begins) batman 3 should be in the present day because if it is set in the future then batman will be weaker older and not able to take as much damage we dont want that we want batman our hero to still be feared be the criminals and the curupt and to defeat the bad guys we want him to think faster move faster and be more stealth the things he cant be when in about 10 or 15 years and the joker shouldnt look different i mean come on brandon lee tenney r u trying to ruin the movies and the effects that hit the audience ……how many of u guys and girls want all the characters to be old there is like no point to do that ….NOW there can be more aggressive expansion but im gonna rap this comment up up and leave my opinion of who i think should be in the batman 3 movie heres my piece i think that the joker should be shown escaping from arkham asylum and that scarecrow and the joker team up and the riddler (johnny depp) should be in the movie from start to finish then towards the middle then thats when joker and scarecrow should come in but of course the movie should show bits and parts of scarecrow and joker commiting crimes in and out of arkham then a big battle at the middle of the movie with the riddler then at the end of the movie with joker scarecrow and the riddler………later this comment was left by the biggest batman fan that knows how to make an entertaining movie ……peace love all the batman movies

the man....batman on Jul 24, 2009

215

ok maybe bringing the scarecrow back has one of the main villains is asking to much i rethought it and i think that the movie should start off with the riddler doing something devious and then close to but not in the start of the movie it should bring in harley quinn and make her break in and help break the joker out of arkham so they can cause mayhem then towards the middle of the movie the should team up with the riddler who riddles them into thinking he wants to help but in reality the riddler and the joker both want gotham in the palm of their hands so at the end there should be a twist where the riddler stands and hides out of batmans way and lets him bring down the joker and harley quinn soon after that happens batman and the riddler fist battle but the riddler escapes………….an alternate ending is to kill harley quinn and the joker and the riddler goes away to arkham asylum untill if there is the 4 batman installment that could bring back the riddler and introduce us to penguin or black mask or freeze one of those or if the writers have better ideas even if chris does to introduce the audience to a new villian so anyway thats my second piece on batman 3 there could be more to come the one the only the batman…. batman theme song into the credits lol ……bye

the man....batman on Jul 24, 2009

216

I think that fans need a nother batman film so what i think is you should creat a dark charicter that dosn't exist yet it will spark more atention to fans an it will make it so it works for you!

josh on Jul 26, 2009

217

I can't agree with a jump in time simply because it makes what we all want possible, another story line with the Joker. Losing Ledger was the Dark Knight's curse. The thrilling speech Joker gives while hanging from the building at the end of the film always gets me in the moment and makes me happy that he'll always be in the story line, after all "we're destined to do this forever". Then I remember Heath's gone. I'm sure it was Nolan's idea, throw away the cliche of a new villain each film. That was going to be the final sign that Chris Nolan actually gets it but like I said Heath's death really closed the doors of possibilities. It's no wonder Nolan seems against the idea of even discussing a new Batman film. The impact Joker had in Batman's world is too huge to pass over. Nolan's films are a realistic view into Batman and how often does someone as crazy as the Joker was in the film, come along in real life after all?

Skipping over a decade is asking a bit much and would ruin the momentum the Dark Knight left us with. The film starts and ends on a high note so how do you pick that up ten years later with a depressed Bruce Wayne? It simply wouldn't work and would be the Godfather 3 of the series. In my opinion you have to bring back Two Face. Though he wasn't on the Joker's scale he was believably introduced and is in the story line already, how that could be done is open to discussion. When the Riddler is brought up, of course it's understandable cause he's a more human character but in the world of Batman he's not much of a threat. How do we establish him as a character and put him on Batman's level in one film? The days of super villains rounding up enough henchmen to do their bidding without explanation are over, Joker changed things.

As a true believer in what was already done I would settle for a less exciting third film as long as it made sense and didn't ruin what was already laid down. I think the next story should pick up a couple months after the Dark Knight with an opening scene involving Gordan because that was Harvey Dent's vision, to fill the shoes of Batman with common authority figures. Bruce Wayne wouldn't be a complete no show to crime fighting but he would be trying to figure out his place, where he's needed. Crime fighting would be more of an addiction he can't give up rather than a deed to his city, a personal get away after losing Rachel and the promise Dent had for change. Both Two Face and the Joker would be stored away in Arkham Asylum under a need to know ordeal. The Riddler would be someone who seeks out the mob, promising to find out who Batman is, in a last attempt to for the mob to gain back control of Gotham they would except. The Riddler has to be a physicolgist, any professional of mental health would be obsessed with Batman. The Riddler could possibly work at Arkham and be studying Two Face at the time, he would feel the effects of Joker's plan to break Gotham's spirits while studying Dent's current mental state. On the other hand in Bruce Wayne's world a new businessman would be taking over Gotham, The Penguin. He doesn't have to be physically weird looking, only essentric. He would also be involved with the mob but only as a means to make more money under the table, sort of the pretty side of crime. It would be more profitable for him to kill Batman. The Penguin would be funding the Riddler's attempt to find out who Batman is. The Riddler in his Batman obsession would easily find out but be too fascinated to reveal anything, he would only mentally test Bruce Wayne. The Riddler would look for a moral connection in why Batman went to save Rachel and got Dent, he would set up similar situations along with the mind bending riddles, though he wouldn't realize what he has become during the process, a villain. The Penguin would find out he's been funding a mad men and want to stop him until he realizes his business competition and his biggest problem all result from one man, Bruce Wayne.

That was kind of long and winded but what do you expect, I smoked half a pack and stayed up late to think of something. I couldn't say no way to an idea unless I had one of my own. If anyone thinks that this was too far a stray from the Dark Knight I want you to know I agree. I wanted another Joker movie from the beginning. It would have been the right thing to do and we all know it, if Heath hadn't died there would be no need for new villains or estranged plots but that's the situation. Personally if they never make another one maybe it's for the best. Doing something because you feel you owe it to people doesn't usually produce magic and then you take into consideration the hurdles to get over just to make a believable story. What a shame the positive effects of art have, the holes of a masterpiece are sometimes better left unfilled.

Driftwood on Jul 28, 2009

218

#217 Driftwood
Your idea is verry good! It makes sense in a way. The only two things I disagree with are:
1."The Riddler could possibly work at Arkham". This would make The Riddler find more about Dent and Batman, as you said, and it's a path wich the film could take; it's a capital idea, but, I don't know, doesn't work for me.
2."The Riddler would be someone who seeks out the mob". Again it makes sense, however Joker did the same in The Dark Knight and it should be left aside to avoid repetition. It's not a big repetition, but still…
Otherwise it's a great "article"! Your ideas match my wishes in the next Batman( if it would be a "next"). Cheers!

me on Jul 28, 2009

219

On second thought your right, the Riddler seeking out the mob would follow too much into what the Joker did. Instead what if he didn't have to seek out the mob but rather already had an on going relationship, possibly loan sharking. He would owe a debt to the mob, for whatever reason but without any means to pay he would offer to find out who the Batman really is. Also instead of him studying Two Face from the get go maybe during his quest to find Batman he gets switched over to a different wing in Arkham to then find out he's to study Dent. Harvey Dent being alive would be a surprise brought out in the middle of the film to keep a pace going and to the Riddler this would be one more push over the brink.

When you take this in your own hands it can go in about a billion different directions. I hope whatever happens there's not an over crowding of villains like in Spider-Man 3. I chose the Riddler because he seems to be everyone's go to guy for the next movie, put the Penguin in the place of a business man so technically he's a villain but not on the bank heist and rumble scale and threw in Two Face so that the Dark Knight isn't forgotten. I think the Scarecrow's appearance in the Dark Knight was just to keep a tie between Batman Begins and somewhere in the next film there has to be the same, something to show the damage.

On a side note, from the first time I saw the Dark Knight I always pictured the Joker in Arkham, he has to go there after all. I've been trying to figure out how to even cameo the character. Could someone else nail the voice just enough to ramble on about nothing from a padded cell or could another actor play the role of the Joker if he didn't have the make up on, they would remove it anyway when he went to Arkham. Even in the sense of a cameo with no lines it's hard to say.

Driftwood on Jul 28, 2009

220

Now that's better, Driftwood! And you have it uprightly, an over crowding of villains isn't so great.
I don't want to be toady or astonished, but man, that was the thing!

me on Jul 29, 2009

221

Mr. Driftwood, I would love to offer applause for your second entry on your batman 3 take. But in my opinion Penguin needs to go. Not that angle of the story per se, but someone else needs to fill that slot and his name is Roman Sionis. You see, Sionis (in the comics) has hated Batman from the beginning and is also a big time Gotham business man. He is about the same age and could be a very interesting character. Problem is, Roman's business goes bust and guess who bails him out, Bruce Wayne. After being humiliated by being bought out by the competition (WAYNE), he goes mad and becomes, The Black Mask. I like that better than the Penguin. The Black Mask could also fund the Riddler's shenanigans.

I would like to keep the Riddler because who doesn’t like puzzle-mystery movies? For the mob, I would like a revenge angle so let's bring in Albert Falcone to seek revenge on the Bat for his daddy’s arrest.

I would go into detail about a plot, but I would to know if the board likes my ideas for villains (Riddler, Black Mask and Falcone) because if everyone thinks they're dumb choices I don't want to be wasting my time. On the other hand I would love to write a summary if people were to like my ideas. Any way's thanks for keeping such an interesting board on Batman 3.

Woody Batman on Jul 30, 2009

222

Don't you guys think that if the Joker was brought back it would make the movie boring? We need a new master mind. The Riddler was a great idea. And the idea of the Batman movie taking place in years is a very bad idea. I mean the movies just stated! Don't rush it. I think this is how the movie should go. Batman is dead. Bruce goes back to his normal life. As time passes criminals start rising. Rupert Thorn takes over the Valcone guys. Harley Quinn takes over the Joker guys. Talia starts The League of Shadows again. A new gang appears run by Penguin starts(witch Mr. Freeze and Bane are apart of). Then there's the Riddler(witch Black Mask and Two-Face are apart of). Gothem divides into those 5 sections. But when there's lots of villains there's lots of heros. Batman alone is BORING. Robin and Batgirl should be in this movie. I haven't decided how this happens but Batman turns into a villain just like Dent said in The Dark Knight you either die or turn into a villain(but who wants Batman to die?). Anyways that would go well with the title Shadow of the Bat.

Batman on Jul 31, 2009

223

@222 batman
this isn't the comics dude it's a movie and having all those characters in it is a very bad idea. Just ask Nolan.

Cat on Jul 31, 2009

224

222

Lets throw in batmite while were at it.

Woody Batman on Jul 31, 2009

225

Robin + Batgirl = total disaster! Please, don't ruin Batman 3. This will end up just like Batman & Robin (1997 film). And two villains should be the limit.

me on Aug 1, 2009

226

First off dont kill off alfred

Secondly, the joker yeah he was awsome , but the riddler is gay. So will eveyone quit talking about using the riddler (AWFUL IDEA). However i do agree with the people who said something about using like penguin or bane or in my opinion you could even use mr. freeze. But i do agree that there shouldn't be more than two villians.

Lastly, i hope they dont use robin but it 's going to happen eventally

burndog on Aug 2, 2009

227

It will take some careful writing to pull it off, but i'd like to see the Penguin in a 3rd movie.

Rugfoot on Aug 2, 2009

228

Seth Rogen for Penguin

SuperBatman on Aug 2, 2009

229

I fully agree with the no Robin policy everyone seems to be ordering. The key to these "new" Batman movies is realism and in that respect he takes allot away from that factor. Another thing I was thinking about was costumes. If you watch any super hero movie the costumes play a key role in believing the whole thing. In the X-Men they couldn't put Wolverine in yellow spandex because in real life aspects that's stupid. When Burndog said the Riddler is gay, thinking about how he dresses in the comics and applying that to real life, he would seem kind of flamboyant. Like that guy that sells books on easy ways to make cash fast. I'm torn cause I want to see things true to the comics but then again I want it to apply well to the real life aspect of the series. Point being if there going to use the Riddler then someone, maybe Johnny Depp needs to play the character really well to pull off the mind set of someone covered in question marks.

Philip Seymour Hoffman should play the Penguin or Paul Giamatti possibly. Woody Batman's got a great idea with the Roman Sionis plot but I just think that once the Joker was introduced everyone wanted more of the main stream familiar faces, people who don't know all the villains would see it as a step down from the Dark Knight, not that the mass public deserves tending to.

I saw some people request Bane. If Bane was to be in the next movie then they better use the adaptation of him in the Vengeance of Bane or the Knightfall series, where he actually had a brain. Maybe use the story line of him breaking Batman's back. Say that Bane is just a short used character that Batman scrambles with then gets hurt. Then he has to use his detective skills to go after whoever else, the Riddler is more of a mind games kind of guy after all. He can't fight Batman so it wouldn't hurt believability if Batman was hurt while hunting him down. That's all just ideas to justify Bane being in the show and to make Batman more of a detective.

Driftwood on Aug 2, 2009

230

When The Joker states, "We are destined to do this forever," that doesn't HAVE to mean specifically with him. It's all in how you interrupt it. You could look at as The Joker foreshadowing the cycles he and Batman will inevitably be caught in, a cat and mouse if you will. Batman has a wide rouge gallery to choose from, so anyone could fit the role of the mouse in this cycle. The Penguin would be very relevant, since power and greed seem to be themes in our current political arena. But anyway you slice it, any character could fit the cycle mentioned.

Bug on Aug 4, 2009

231

In Chris Nolan's effort to make something more realistic in his Batman franchise, he ended up straying too far from the comic books in many ways. I wish we could get, for once, a seriously muscled Batman who doesn't have to hide his physique under heavy inflexible armor. Also, Chris Nolan forgot to set up for us HOW Bruce seems to know about advanced electronics and computer systems as he demonstrated at the end of The Dark Knight. Also, I simply don't sense great intelligence from Christian Bale's Bruce Wayne. He seems to be an average guy with money. That is not Batman. Batman is highly intuitive and highly intelligent. Very little gets past him, not because he's lucky, but because he's simply that good a detective and that devoted to his job.
And I'll speak openly about my opinion on Heath Ledger's/ Chris Nolan's Joker. He lacks energy and doesn't seem to enjoy his work like the Joker traditionally does. And okay, he doesn't look anything like the Joker's supposed to! Why do we stray so far from the template when what the fans want is a shining portrayal of the template? For an example of what I mean, take a look at some of Batman The Dark Knight trailers and video on Youtube. THAT is Batman. THAT is the Joker. PLEASE, give us that? Just once? In live action movie form? Marvel has done it with Spiderman, Ironman, and The Incredible Hulk, and fans respond positively. Gee, maybe that really is what we want? Get with it, DC.

eeeman on Aug 13, 2009

232

@eeeman

you're in the 1% with your opinions.

Cat on Aug 13, 2009

233

i like the artical, i just don't care for your title, "the batman" its honestly a horrible name, expecially for this trilogy, don't get me wrong i really liked your artical and your point of view and i agree on everything but the name, its not creative and it is not likely to see "the" in front of any other superhero movie unless "the" was in their name to begin with ex. the flash, the green lantern, ect. i would say rethink the name of the movie, and that is all i would change.

mike on Aug 14, 2009

234

he said he will refer to it as batman 3. this guy isnt the director or producer or anything dude….

DJ Ward on Aug 14, 2009

235

i will see batman 3 i will see eddie murphy as the riddler marlon waynes as robin heath ledger as the joker i like heath ledger as the joker he's cool so i will see heath ledger as the joker with eddie murphy as the riddler on batman 3 movie this will be awsome so batman 3 is in theatres july 2011 see ya.

andries price on Aug 14, 2009

236

Well I would think if they are getting underway with the movie then by now they would have a trailer on you tube, or on an offical fan site. News flash to number 235 Heath Ledger has past away months ago and quite frankly I find it offensive, not to my self, but to his family that someone would be so ignerent to his/her seroundings to not even turn on the news. I am looking forward to the movie, but i hope that there is no other joker because as far as i am conserned out of the three movies that were made with the joker as a villin only Heath Ledger could play him. Thank you…

William Striner on Aug 16, 2009

237

I completely agree with the time thing, but if your gonna go with the time theme, then you need to demenstrate how batman (bruce) has grown more mature and more intelligent. And the person to do that is……………….THE RIDDLER!!!!! no joker, and Johnny Depp would do great. And i KNow Christian Bale would not do Batman 3 with a Robin, but Robin is needed. If your doing a time theme than batman needs someone to keep him up with the hip things. Robin is essential I think to finish out the trilogy. I know alot of ppl disagree but those are my opinions……

Batman on Aug 16, 2009

238

What a wonderful article. I thought that it was very good.

Brittany Sirois on Aug 16, 2009

239

I thought that both of the new Batman movies was very good like Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. I can't wait until Batman 3 comes into threatres.

Brittany Sirois on Aug 16, 2009

240

that was dumb

name on Aug 18, 2009

241

The Joker should have his place solely in the 2nd movie. The movie stands on it's own.

It was a test, a growing stage, a stage filled with losses that will forever haunt Bruce Wayne.

Why dillute the powerful lesson and aura that surrounds "The Joker" ( as well as Heath Ledger ) by trying to ressurect "The Joker" (even decades later) just to try to get some warm, fuzzy feelings again.

If you need your warm, fuzzies then have "The Joker" as a kind of homage character whose influence is seen but the character itself is never seen.

I would like to see the next Batman movie much like the first Batman movie. Without any mainstream villains (The Riddler, Penguin, etc) and get away from this cliche mumbo jumbo that plagued the Batman's before.

John J on Aug 18, 2009

242

Adrian Brody as the Joker…he'd be a good one for the way that role went.

Tony on Aug 18, 2009

243

No offense, but I didn't like it at all. That whole idea just doesn't work for me. Like the Joker in the second film, or Scarecrow in the first part of the appeal of Nolan's series is introducing these characters and presenting them as forces against Batman in a really interesting way. The thing that keeps it interesting is that they are HIS struggles, and they make things harder for HIM. And what further seperates it from the typical 'Superhero/Villain' of the month fair, is it's grounding in reality - most of all in CONTEMPORARY society. The future allows for things like nono-machines and other sci-fi elements that would allow characters like Mr.Freeze or Clayface to exist. - While Nolan is maybe the ONLY guy who could tackle something like this and make it work, such a serious departure from the original style sounds like a death warrant to me, and quite a foolish thing to do in the dreaded third film.

I want to see a sequel to The Dark Knight. It sounds like you're looking for Nolan to do a Batman inspired remake of BladeRunner.

I'd say your heads are in the clouds - but I like your imagination.

Brandon on Aug 18, 2009

244

I meant to say NANO machines btw, and it's a shame I made it sound like the 3rd film is dreaded. I meant to say that many third films don't work - for many reasons, but they usually deviate from the style of the first two out of insecurity and wind up ruining the franchise. Some people just don't have the confidence to make a coherent whole. They feel like an over-indulgance in 'freshness' is the only option.

Brandon on Aug 18, 2009

245

Two words: Bane, Azrael (look up Azrael if you dont know who he is). Batman fights Bane/Azrael, Batman helps Azreal, Bane breaks the Batman, Azrael steps in to fill Bruce's shoes, but unlike Bruce, Jean-Paul will kill people. Thats an easy story line that I think would be good and would work in keeping with the darkness of Nolan's movies. Whats darker than Batman killing someone?

237: Why is Robin needed? How would he fit into the dark aura that is Nolan's Batman? If anything it should be Night Wing. One in the same, I know, but I think it can be done without introducing Grayson as Robin first. Thats the magic of movies.

Bob on Aug 18, 2009

246

I've been wanting to see a film adaptation of the Knightfall novel (I found it a better telling of the stpry than the seven or so linked comic series') since i read it when I was twelve.

When I first heard Joker was the villain in the second of Nolan's movies, I was hoping for a brief scenario like that in Knightfall with him, the Scarecrow and the Mayor…I was later disappoineted by the lack of the Scarecrow's character development, but the Dark Knight is cinematic and storytelling gold regardless.

Tony on Aug 18, 2009

247

i agree with the whole nolan continuing the series. its definitely a must, and rest assured, it WILL happen. i promise, he wont just walk away from this. i know he said that he isnt sure if he can do better than the dark knight, but he'll realize soon that he is the only person qualified enough to give it a shot.

as for the skipping into the future thing, very cool idea, but it would have to have a plot going on about his whole ordeal in the past years, and then there should be a current plot in present day with a villain. to show the hard ships he went through in the years passed, and show how its reflecting on his ability to triumph as batman against a current villain in one final showdown for not the heart of gotham, but the eyes and the opinions of the people in it. so he can finally come to be the caped crusader. not a dark knight, but a hero. hence, I personally think the third film should be titled, "the caped crusader", batman begins is the beginning, the dark knight is the descent into … the dark, and the caped crusader is his rise t hero-dom. after years of struggle, mental and physical. as bruce, and batman. however, definitely not decades. dont cut out alfred and dont throw in a whole aged batman thing. besides, michael cane already signed for 3 films….

Jake on Aug 18, 2009

248

I like that some of the later posts mentioned the Dark Knight as a transition film and not the climax, not that I believe any film should be slatted as such because it could never live up to it. In the Dark Knight there is no bat cave and some of the other key pieces that surround Batman aren't there yet either so there's still some room to build. Once the whole Batman package is complete then we'll see something. The next movie has to have all the hallmarks of Batman and Gotham city. Gordon just became commissioner and two of the classic criminals have been sent to Arkham Asylum, two counting Two Face who should still be alive. Now is the perfect time to open up a new chapter because it finally feels right if you ask me. Batman Begins was Batman working on a smaller underground level, The Dark Knight was the large scale transition that ushered in the super villains. Everything is in place. So if the next movie comes out one day and you think, "well it's no Dark Knight" just look at it this way, you liked the early saga phases. On that note forget spending half a movie explaining why The Riddler, Penguin or whoever became the way they are and just except that the stakes have been raised. Whatever villain shows up in the next movie should just step on the field and play ball, that's what the Joker did in the Dark Knight. The Joker took Harvey Dent and brought him down to his and Batman's level, more people should be dropping down there soon enough anyway.

Driftwood on Aug 18, 2009

249

If they want to do something way into the future, why not consider a variation on the original "Dark Knight" comic and have an aged Batman confront an aged enemy? In this instance - and I'm very serious - I think (with the right direction) you could get Adam West to portray the aged Batman. The enemy could be either James Woods or Christopher Walken as Riddler (rather than an older Joker, as in the "Dark Knight" comic). Either could bring a genuine menace to the character.

tim on Aug 21, 2009

250

Tim, pls lay off the blow for your own sake

JB on Aug 24, 2009

251

Interesting, but a series of flashbacks filled with random fights with infamous villains and no real plot for the present? I don't think it would be very popular.

mt on Aug 26, 2009

252

Great thought, but I still think the important thing is to finish the story of Batman. We need a ending to show that the city is heading in the right direction and that Batman himself will be there on the building tops protecting the innocent. I think this could be done with the Penguin coming in as the new leader of the mob. He does not have to be some weird deformed man, but a man whose got the nickname because of the way he wobbles when he walks caused by the broken leg he got as an up and coming thug. The Riddler adds an aspect of finding out from Mr Reese who Batman is and tormenting the Dark Knight. Whatever the end result I am sure we will love it as long as Chris Nolan is the one to finish it and not some action director.

Joe on Aug 26, 2009

253

I'm amazed that Jason Todd isn't mentioned more.

Gildroy on Aug 26, 2009

254

It's too bad Heath Ledger died. The Dark Knight was amazing and i was so hopeful that the joker would return in the next one. Obviously there was going to be a next one. This story line seems kind of weird. I'm not sure if this movie will be able to transition from joker to no joker. The joker MADE The Dark Knight. He was one of big reasons why that movie was a success. He played the part perfectly and was the psycho path who made me keep watching. Lets only hope that Batman 3 will be as good as the other two.

Nick on Aug 27, 2009

255

Nice thought, but not good for the next Batman chapter. We need this to go full circle. Ras Al Ghul returns and Rachel is revealed to be his daughter. She has been revived via the Lazarus pit and is no longer the sweet girl we know. Bruce will discover his whole life and career have been orchestrated by the Demon.

Jon on Sep 2, 2009

256

I have to say that you are an amazing writer. I can completely understand where you are coming from and it sounds like a very good idea.

CraNk1tEAzy on Sep 13, 2009

257

Ok, so this is better than all the crappy rumors people having been leaving online, but not by much. There is no way they are ever going to bring that Joker back at all! Period. the whole time passing thing has been done too many times and would be cliche and boring. I don't know where you got Alfred dying from, because that would only make any sense if about ten years had passed. The Joker is done, and is Nolan sees fit to incorperate an aftermath into the next movie then I'm good with that but nothing else. Villians like the Riddle are essential to the plot at hand. In addition, The Batman is about the most sappy and cliche title they could possibly use. So, in conclusion, this concept would just not work. It's not a bad idea, but it isn't up to Nolan standards I'm afraid. Too bad, your not a bad writer, although there was a typo in there, but I can't complain, I'm sure what I'm writing know has typos. So anyway, better luck next time.

eric on Sep 19, 2009

258

1. The Joker is done. Get over it. It's the perfect opportunity to walk away (from the character) while on top, and is the perfect, albeit subtle, manifestation of Harvey Dent's 'creed': you either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become a villain. Chris Nolan understands that everything is better in moderation, regardless of fan sentiment.

2. Any sort of sci-fi characters are out of the picture. That said, I would be open to a rendition of a merely handicapped, as opposed to deformed, Penguin, so long as the role was interpreted by Phillip Seymour Hoffman. His dramatic ability is unmatched by anyone on the silver screen today, with the exception of Daniel Day-Lewis.

3. The author's idea only works if there is the same amount of time separating the release of TDK and B3 as passes within the two movies. As we saw with LOST, the worst thing you can do to the most popular entertainment piece in its respective medium is to unnecessarily alter the perception (and actualization) of time. It's unbelievable and alienates a $1bn audience.

4. The best ideas from this forum belong to #37 and #137. I love the idea of Edward Nigma starting off as a 'legitimate' investigator trying to find Batman, then getting so obsessed with the hunt that he morphs into something different, as Batman and Harvey Dent (pre-Two Face) almost did in their search for the Joker. Think Willem Dafoe in 'Boondock Saints', but cold-blooded instead of righteous. It becomes unclear exactly who is hunting who, and because Batman is occupied with avoiding capture and trying to find the Riddler, crime once again runs rampant in Gotham. The Riddler has an appropriate financier and ally in (a realistic) Black Mask, staying true to the two-villain hierarchy we've seen in Nolan's Batmen thus far.

Should this be the final Batman, a fitting ending would be to have Batman defeating the Riddler and Black Mask, but being badly injured in the process (by Bane, if fans really need things to remain true to the comics), to the point that he is rendered useless in the fight to save Gotham. Comm. Gordon uses the opportunity to kill Bane, and with all of the major crime threats — the ones introduced in the movies, anyway — eliminated from the city, he becomes the mask-less hero and leader that Batman has been searching for. Batman has his redemption, but it must be left open-ended enough to avoid campiness.

Steve on Sep 24, 2009

259

that article was genius. you could write the script for The Batman.

nick on Sep 29, 2009

260

This is retarded. Time would do nothing for this at all. All the makings for this taking place a month from the end of the movie are in place. Riddler in the comics is brought in by police and oh how convenient they happen to be hunting batman as we speak. He already said no Robin and he wants to give some of the "lesser" villains attention. Joker probably will be recast, but not for this film.

Mr. Freeze, Catwoman, and Bane are just a few examples of people who don't grasp this world that was created. They have no place in this world and just don't make much sense.

adam on Sep 30, 2009

261

Brandon, I think you're completely wrong. We've seen the Joker. Let's see some new villains. Let's see how Nolan can recreate the Riddler, Penguin, Catwoman, and maybe even some of the others so that they can be a part of the Batman world he has created. After all, we had never seen Two Face or the Joker in quite the same light before. Nolan took those characters and made them real and dangerous and very relavent. I'd say he could do that for some of the other villains as well.

But this notion that there should be a trilogy only, I'm against. We finally have a good take on Batman. Why not make it a good long series? Why not tell a whole story? I hope that's what they do. I hope there'll be at least another two or three movies. Why rush it? Let Nolan tell the story, make it lasting, and give us something to really be pulled into. A trilogy alone would leave out so much of a story that could be told.

Ed on Sep 30, 2009

262

I think that this idea is very good and there could possibly be a batman who still performs his duties but doesn't want to and then he loses his butler and hires a younger one. The butler would then turn out to be robin but batman himself will not know this and robin becomes popular with the public. I also think the Harley Quinn should be in this film possibly as a stand off with robin while batman goes on to fight Joker who is secretly behind it all. Just a thought.

Jordan on Oct 4, 2009

263

I really like what you have here. There are some good story lines. I think that if the joker escapes, it will have to be years in the future because this would allow for a different type of joker as we had with Heath Ledger. But, there are a lot of different ways you can go with this series. I ultimately see this series becoming a four movie series. With the huge success of The Dark Knight, there is no way that the movie can just stop at a third movie. I would like to see the reinventing of the Joker. Following that, the loss of Alfred is a must. This must be done during the third movie as someone the Joker goes after. This will be the last person Batman/Bruce Wayne has and will plummet him into further darkness. I think the third movie should have two villains with the Joker and someone other than cat-woman. Cat-woman can be someone in the fourth movie as Bruce/Batman comes out of the darkness and becomes the hero that everyone knew and then vanishes. This will only happen as Bruce finds some love interest too though. So, third movie should have Joker and maybe Hangman. The battle against these two super villains will show Gotham that Batman is someone they need and trust. The fourth movie will show Batman have an ultimate battle against someone we have never seen before. All in all, four movies, that is it!

Jon on Oct 18, 2009

264

ok, I'm seeing a lot of talk about Alfred dying. Once again, killing Alfred would be like taking Lois Lane out of the Superman story. He acts as the inner voice of Bruce Wayne in Batman. He constantly reminds Batman that Bruce is an equally important aspect of his duel life, which both helps and hinders him. I would agree however that he needs to be reworked. Michael Kane is just comic relief, and while Alfred was seen as very sarcastic in the comics, he is still a little more reserved than that. Bottom line: Alfred is as important to batman as the use of a Batmobile, you can't just change the story, there are plenty of things that could happen to batman that make the character darker. This also brings up the question as to whether or not he has to be "darker". Darker implies that he would be more pushed to break his "one rule". I think that batman needs to be more determined. After the death of Jason Todd, batman became more driven and more withdrawn from others, leading to how he became tired and sick, which lead to his back being broken by Bane. Batman needs to fail at something big to push is determination to the edge, thus pushing him to the edge. A batman inches away from his breaking point is what i want to see in the next movie.

Galla on Oct 18, 2009

265

Great comments. Galla i completely agree with you. Alfred is a voice of reason that keeps Bruce Wayne sane. It is a very delicate balancing act between the life of Bruce Wayne and the life of the Dark Knight that could drive Bruce Wayne to the brink of insanity, especially now with the people of Gothem hunting him down like the very criminals he has dedicated his life to bring to justice. In TDK Wayne almost gave up and Alfred was there to tell him that he needs to endure it all. Now with Batman being hunted down like a dog by everyone in Gothem he will need him more than ever. This man hunt can have Wayne holding on by a thread giving up all hope and regress to an internal darker place. Additionaly, there should be no Joker in the trilogy. The flawless portrayal of the joker by Ledger is too fresh in our minds and would be a handicap to the next joker if brought back too soon. I do agree though that Batman should have a love interest. However i think it should be Talia al Ghul, the daughter of Ras al Ghul, which i dont recall seeing in any Batman Movies. I am still undecided on who the male villains should be. Now i do believe there should be a 4th movie as well. The trilogy should end with a camera slowly going through a long corridor of the Arkham Asylum. Slowly zooming in through the little small window of a solitary confinement cell. There we see a dark figure sitting on a chair with his back towards us in the middle of the empty room. As we get closer we see the figure sitting with his head down which is undoubtedly The Joker and it ends there.

Manny on Oct 22, 2009

266

wow brandon that was pretty deep its nolan or nothin and whoever replaces joker (please dear god no johnny depp) better be ready and prepared for what heath ledger left for him. Batman Forever and Ever

max s. on Oct 23, 2009

267

do you know whats great about DC. to make their movies they take long periods of time to make movies like 2 or 3 years. but with marvel its a movie every year. DC kick ass

max s. on Oct 23, 2009

268

guys who say its not going to be a trilogy remember when police are chasing batman into the night, thats proboally going to be what leads to 3 a police army chasing after batman while gordon always tells the bat so hes one step ahead there is going to be a villain or two working together(please dont be freeze or penguin) that makes gotham realize that they need batman the warrant is called off and batman goes on to tthe rest of his life kicking butt and taking names

max s. on Oct 23, 2009

269

Here's the thing: Heath Ledger was superb, and making a sequel other than Nolan's vision is just a kick in the nuts for Nolan. Nolan simply needs a new actor, one that has the potential to best Heath Ledger as far as the joker is concerned. The voice acting is cake; hell I can do it perfectly and it only took me a week of practice.

If Nolan really wanted to make the sequel, he'd do it. But if I were him, I'd be too wrapped up in the fact that Ledger died before he could continue his vision. Nobody can outmatch Heath's performance as an actor of the Joker (sorry Jack, you suck).

Irving Severino on Oct 28, 2009

270

I agree that there should be a Batman 3, I dont care what they name it as long as Nolan is behind that camera. It would be nice to have the flashbacks like in Batman Begins. Brandon, yor article was awesome. Again, I agree that we need an "end", because I know I do. And, I don't think that casting another Joker would be a good idea, because no one can ever surpass Heath Ledgers Joker, his performance was better than great.

Kimberly on Oct 29, 2009

271

Ok, I agree with what some of you are saying…This Series needs a final chapter and it needs to be Chris behind those cameras..Give Nolan whatever he wants to get it done….However, I dont believe he intended to use the Joker as the main villain in his third film, should he decide to do it…I know, i know what the joker said at the end of the film hanging upside down, " Destined to do this forever", but, I think he was only going to bring Heath back to do do something small in the third, like the trial of the Joker or something like that…Afterall, that is what he did with Scarecrow….I could be wrong, though….Whatever was planned, you simply cannot use another actor to play the Joker as the main villain,now, but I do think Nolan could get away with a minor part for the joker played by somebody else…I mean, Joker is in Arkham now, its not like he would still have his face painted…I personally would like to see Riddler as the main villain for the third installment. Come on Nolan, dont let the millions of fans down, do the third one!!!!

Dennis on Oct 30, 2009

272

After reading this yes Chirs Nolan should consider doing Batman 3. Keeping Bale as batman. Even if they can not bring the joker back does not mean the trilogy should stop. A good plot would be bringing the riddler in to frame batman for his crimes since batman is already wanted by the police. Bring in the character cat women a jewel thief but also a watchful protector over women and how cat women has a crush on batman. Bring in Mr. Freeze to have vengence on the Italian mob from taking his women life for not doing what the mob wanted him to do. A batman 3 is a must…But the hipe of the first two movies is what they would have to bring to the table. I know Christopher Nolan can make a third movie that is even better than the first two… its the creativity he needs to bring and lots of characters to make it even better than the first two. Like alot of other movies the 3 movie is never as good but I think Nolan can change that!

Michael Brinkmann on Nov 1, 2009

273

Ok first of all I would like to say many great comments from most of you. After reading this forum, I really feel that there are many MANY hardcore Batman (or should I say the Dark Knight) FANS out there just like me), and kept me believing that there will ULTIMATELY be a Third Installment to one of the Greatest Films of the Century.

I would like to share a few of my ideas as well with you all….

'A Hero is only as strong as his/her Villains… The greater the Villain the greater the Hero.'

And it's gonna take a whole new meaning or level of what we formerly known as the "bad guy" or in this case, villain to fully achieved the audience expectations of the third series. Nolan has shown us about the 'Joker' character as a figure completely, utterly pure evil. The key word here is PURE. He has no reason to become who he is/was or what he is. He is just evil, period, without any factors or reasons( Remember the scene he burnt the pile of $ in the blazing fire; one of my fav. scene). He understand and fully thrives upon the Chaos Theory. He has absolutely no reason to be good nor evil. He could be a complete good scientist genius or a wreck evil psychopath without a hint of reason. This gave him ultimate control over the system and order which the 'good' relies upon as the movie portrays so well. It shows that we humans, just like the batman are good because there always has a attached reason behind it. In order to defeat the Joker, the batman had to ultimately become the complete opposite of the Joker which is PURE GOOD or Saint or even 'Guardian Knight'.. whatever you wish to name it. However his ultimate downfall comes when he

"BELIEVES"

In order words The joker believes or Expects that humans are ultimately evil when there's no reason behind them what so ever. He believes in survival of the fittest (ferry ride scene) and he tried to prove it. To cut it short the good guys in the movie faced that challenge and prevail over it with some casualties.

My point is that Nolan may recreates the characters from before, or maybe wait a few years to enchant the original characters or whatever, but unless he can come up with something more than this Hero-to-Villain equation, the 3rd Batman film would be for me be nothing short of a disappointment.

So being said that, How can we top the evilness of a villain so pure, so genuine so profound??

We need a Villain far more powerful, more controlled, more careful, more mindful, more balanced, more stable with higher wisdom who not only understands but is able to embrace the profound. A villain who does not believes in good OR evil, who does not believes in reasons, needs, desires, but only the meaningless and nothingness of life, that everything is neither here nor there, and no such thing as order nor chaos. Yes i know I'm pushing it but wouldn't it be soooooo goood!????

FIND THAT, CREATE THAT and WE HAVE A THIRD and FINAL ONE!

Titman on Nov 2, 2009

Christopher Nolan's Batman 3 - It Starts and Ends with Time

Related Articles

Reader Feedback - 273 Comments »

Leave a Comment

Inglourious Basterds	10/10
It Might Get Loud	9/10
Inglourious Basterds	8.5/10
Star Trek	9/10
Monsters vs Aliens	5/10