Harvey Dent/Two Face Thread

[Crook]

But you're missing my point. My point is that sure there is a great many of villains to choose from, and personally I would love to see Bat's go up against The Black Mask, or Scareface/Ventriloquist, or Anarchy, but the average movie goer will see those names and ask "who are those guys"?
Success isn't generated by recognition. What do you think the general public thought of Joker, Penguin, Catwoman, and Riddler when they were first shown on Adam West's show? "Ooh, I LOVE those guys"? No. I bet half of them didn't even know they existed. But as they watched the show, they became intrigued and eventually grew to like them.

Those 3 that I just mention will not bring as big as a bank as The Penguin, The Riddler, or Catwoman.
I completely disagree. Audiences are gained by a "hook". I think if Mr. Freeze were done right, utilizing amazing visuals related to his freezing capabilities, it would bring in a much bigger audience than either of those 3.

Because of the age factor. There's alot of fanboys who's 1st exposure to Batman was via this cartoon, so there's alot of who think that BTAS is the be all and end all of the Batman media- or definitive if you must. And granted, it was done in a great style and atmosphere that was comparable to the tone of the Batman flicks at the time. But lets face it, it really fed off the artistic licensing of Bruce Timm and Paul Dini. I won't even mention my opinion of making Harley Quinn canon.
I think you're undermining quite a bit of what that team brought to the mythos. I admit, I grew up on this cartoon, but I'm not the type of person to like something purely because of a childhood love. I've watched many shows and movies that I watched and adored as a kid, but I've simply grown out of that phase. In relation to the Batman world, I "loved" Adam West's show and B&R. Now? I think their quality is not up to snuff in the least.

Timm and co. on the other hand, I've consistently been a fan of. You honestly think their changes to Freeze and Clayface in particular, were for the worse, just because they deviated from the source material?

[Diablo101]

No one is understanding why Nolan has killed off Dent.

Batman has to make a huge sacrifice at the end of the movie because of Dent. This sacrifice adds to the mythos of Batman and shows why he is "the silent guardian, the Dark Knight." The only way for this sacrifice to happen is by having Dent dying. Keeping him alive ruins the whole point.

Remember folks, in the end, while Joker may "steal" the film and Dent is the "backbone", it all comes back to Batman in the end

[Gianakin_]

Ra's death leaves no window. If you think it does, fine, but it would be bloody awful if he returned.

It was a rather extreme example, because he'll need a Lazarus Pit to get out of that mess, but my point still stands. A convincing enough death, but with a window.

Ah, but the impact for someone going back to watch THE DARK KNIGHT on repeat viewings will be diluted, because the fake-out will be apparent. The death will have been merely an illusion.

Well, if the whole "I am your father" twist is still working, I wouldn't worry about Dent's "death".

No, it wouldn't. Because once Two-Face makes a reappearance, the damage is done. And Batman's decision to honor his memory has been entirely in vain. It makes the whole scenario of Two-Face's death a rather pointless fake-out.

Yes, it takes Batman by surprise because he doesn't know he's alive. And yes, the decision will have been in vain, and that will be a major theme in the film.

[itsthebatman]

Ra's death leaves no window. If you think it does, fine, but it would be bloody awful if he returned.


Ah, but the impact for someone going back to watch THE DARK KNIGHT on repeat viewings will be diluted, because the fake-out will be apparent. The death will have been merely an illusion.


No, it wouldn't. Because once Two-Face makes a reappearance, the damage is done. And Batman's decision to honor his memory has been entirely in vain. It makes the whole scenario of Two-Face's death a rather pointless fake-out.
This ending leaves Batman tainted in the eyes of Gothamites. Fine for this movie, but how can he truly redeem himself in BB3 if Two-Face's crimes do not become public knowledge? Will he change his mind and let the cat out of the bag, or will someone else do it for him? The only way Batman can be redeemed in part III is for Two-Face to reappear, and be taken into custody by the Bat. I'd rather Dent's name be tainted than Batmans - Gotham will realies they need a Dark Knight, not a white knight.

[Agentsands77]

This is truly a wasted opportunity to give Two-Face a starring role in BB3, great as Harvey Dent's role seems to be in this one.
In what is likely to be only a three-film series, do we really need two whole films dominated by Harvey Dent?

[Gianakin_]

Have you taken a break all day man? Still fighting the good fight.

I'm sitting an exam tomorrow and I'm not 100% studying, I'm sorta multitasking. It's cool, though.

The problem with this decision is not about its effect on the film. I'm sure a non-Batman fan coming into it would have no problems with what happens, and even as a Batman film I do not feel that it will ruin the film, in the same way as hoboJoker and the crappy Batsuit will make no particular difference. My problem is that it cuts off further opportunities for telling stories with this character, and does so in a fashion that makes it impossible to bring him back. This is truly a wasted opportunity to give Two-Face a starring role in BB3, great as Harvey Dent's role seems to be in this one.

Exactly, 100% exactly. I'm sure TDK will retain its original quality no matter what.

[Diablo101]

He redeems himself by doing what he always does: Save the day. Doesn't need to take the blame off of him. Because that's what heroes do: They take the blame even when it's not their fault, and keep on going what they keep doing.

[DarthSkywalker]

Ra is a ninja. Man could of been burned alive on screen and I would still be fine if he returned.

[DarthSkywalker]

Stupid double post.

[Crook]

No one is understanding why Nolan has killed off Dent.

Batman has to make a huge sacrifice at the end of the movie because of Dent. This sacrifice adds to the mythos of Batman and shows why he is "the silent guardian, the Dark Knight." The only way for this sacrifice to happen is by having Dent dying. Keeping him alive ruins the whole point.

Remember folks, in the end, while Joker may "steal" the film and Dent is the "backbone", it all comes back to Batman in the end
You're confusing what "fits the story and future themes" with "this is the only way it has to be done".

In what is likely to be only a three-film series, do we really need two whole films dominated by Harvey Dent?
Considering both sides of the personality are vastly different, it's not like we're retreading old ground.

[DarthSkywalker]

You're confusing what "fits the story and future themes" with "this is the only way it has to be done".


Considering both sides of the personality are vastly different, it's not like we're retreading old ground.

Good point and also Dent wouldn't need to dominate the second. You could have all four (Riddler, Catwoman, Harvey, and Penguin) in a third film. They would all serve different roles.

[Agentsands77]

Well, if the whole "I am your father" twist is still working, I wouldn't worry about Dent's "death".
Irrelevant example. We weren't told in RETURN OF THE JEDI that Luke *wasn't* Vader's son, were we?

This ending leaves Batman tainted in the eyes of Gothamites. Fine for this movie, but how can he truly redeem himself in BB3 if Two-Face's crimes do not become public knowledge?
Who says he has to redeem himself? Part of the whole point of THE DARK KNIGHT, as far as I've gathered from the clips, is that Bruce has to come to terms with a shift in the role of the Batman. Perhaps permanently.

Heck, he's always been an iffy figure in the comics. Even recently, when the rumor was going around that he shot Joker in the face, Batman said, "Let's keep it that way."

[Agentsands77]

Considering both sides of the personality are vastly different, it's not like we're retreading old ground.
Well, sure it would. Both sides are present in THE DARK KNIGHT.

It's like looking at THE LONG HALLOWEEN versus DARK VICTORY. The second has some good Two-Face moments, but on the whole, it just feels like more of what THE LONG HALLOWEEN already did.

[Crook]

Well, sure it would. Both sides are present in THE DARK KNIGHT.

It's like looking at THE LONG HALLOWEEN versus DARK VICTORY. The second has some good Two-Face moments, but on the whole, it just feels like more of what THE LONG HALLOWEEN already did.
A small role in TDK hardly constitutes as grounds for "been there done that", if explored in a future film.

Besides, he doesn't have to be the only villain in the movie. Nolan likes to intertwine various subplots and characters, I presume he would not change the formula for a possible sequel.

[Gianakin_]

Irrelevant example. We weren't told in RETURN OF THE JEDI that Luke *wasn't* Vader's son, were we?

No, but my point was about the impact. The Vader/father thing, just like Dent's death makes an impact and is a twist. But they're both one-offs. Once you see them, the element of suprise is gone.

[itsthebatman]

Who says he has to redeem himself? Part of the whole point of THE DARK KNIGHT, as far as I've gathered from the clips, is that Bruce has to come to terms with a shift in the role of the Batman. Perhaps permanently.

Heck, he's always been an iffy figure in the comics. Even recently, when the rumor was going around that he shot Joker in the face, Batman said, "Let's keep it that way."
How would he re-establish his alliance with Gordon, and his uneasy relationship with the rest of the GPD, if he's wanted for murder and can't prove his innocence? It's not like Gordon will tell the rest of GPD 'You know, it wasn't Batman that killed those guys, it was Dent, but keep it under your hat, yeah?' and that'll restore everything.

[Agentsands77]

No, but my point was about the impact. The Vader/father thing, just like Dent's death makes an impact and is a twist. But they're both one-offs. Once you see them, the element of suprise is gone.
The surprise? Yes. The emotion and dramatic power is still there, however. But you tell the audience that Vader was lying to Luke in that scene, when they go back to watch EMPIRE, you've robbed that moment of all of its impact.

[Agentsands77]

A small role in TDK hardly constitutes as grounds for "been there done that", if explored in a future film.
We're getting a substantial amount of Two-Face in THE DARK KNIGHT, just like we got a substantial amount of Two-Face in THE LONG HALLOWEEN. And just like DARK VICTORY feels like more of the same, I cannot see a way in which a Two-Face appearance in a third film wouldn't be giving us more of what we already got.

[Gianakin_]

The surprise? Yes. The emotion and dramatic power is still there, however. But you tell the audience that Vader was lying to Luke in that scene, when they go back to watch EMPIRE, you've robbed that moment of all of its impact.

Ah, but after that, if you thematically tie it in the main theme of BB3, the return would not feel like cheating.

[Crook]

We're getting a substantial amount of Two-Face in THE DARK KNIGHT, just like we got a substantial amount of Two-Face in THE LONG HALLOWEEN. And just like DARK VICTORY feels like more of the same, I cannot see a way in which a Two-Face appearance in a third film wouldn't be giving us more of what we already got.
You get a substantial amount of Harvey, not Two-Face. Besides, I don't see how you could use up all he has to offer as a villain, with a mere appearance in the last fifth of the film.

[Gianakin_]

We're getting a substantial amount of Two-Face in THE DARK KNIGHT, just like we got a substantial amount of Two-Face in THE LONG HALLOWEEN. And just like DARK VICTORY feels like more of the same, I cannot see a way in which a Two-Face appearance in a third film wouldn't be giving us more of what we already got.

Dark Victory didn't handle things too well with 2Face and the aftermath of the TLH events. The potential was right there for the reaping, though.

[Agentsands77]

Ah, but after that, if you thematically tie it in the main theme of BB3, the return would not feel like cheating.
It would still rob the scene of its emotional and dramatic impact. That's unavoidable.

[DarthSkywalker]

A small role in TDK hardly constitutes as grounds for "been there done that", if explored in a future film.

Besides, he doesn't have to be the only villain in the movie. Nolan likes to intertwine various subplots and characters, I presume he would not change the formula for a possible sequel.

Exactly the thing that Nolan has done so well is mix the villains, love interest, and plots together. He knows how to set a pecking order.

[David Rice]

I don't get how people think Freeze could work AT ALL in the Nolan-verse.

Easy. Give him a weapon that shoots liquid nitrogen. Remember T2?

[Gianakin_]

It would still rob the scene of its emotional and dramatic impact. That's unavoidable.

How? If the audience feel cheated the same way that Batman does, that means the theme will get to them.

[DarthSkywalker]

It would still rob the scene of its emotional and dramatic impact. That's unavoidable.

I don't get this point. It doesn't change the moment. The moment happens and how you feel when it does will not be changed from a film made three years later. You outlook after might, but if what happens in the third matches or even goes beyond the second film I doubt anyone would care.

[itsthebatman]

We're getting a substantial amount of Two-Face in THE DARK KNIGHT, just like we got a substantial amount of Two-Face in THE LONG HALLOWEEN. And just like DARK VICTORY feels like more of the same, I cannot see a way in which a Two-Face appearance in a third film wouldn't be giving us more of what we already got.
As Crook says, TDK is mainly about Harvey, with a little bit of Two-Face thrown in. It certainly doesn't utilise all that Two-Face has to offer. I would LOVE for there to be a returning villain in the Batman series - Magneto in X2 and Lex Luthor in Superman 2 have shown that it can be done without feeling like 'more of what we got'. There are different themes to be explored - TDK is about the fall of Harvey Dent, BB3 could be about Batman attempting to rehabilitate, as covered in DKR. If you actually think that is an uninteresting route to go down, and would give us something we truly haven't seen in a Batman movie, there's nothing more I can say to convince you.
As for interesting post-origin Two-Face stories: Dark Victory, Robin: Year One, his parts in Knightfall and No Man's Land, Crime and Punishment, Dark Knight Returns, A Lonely Place of Dying, Half A Life.

[David Rice]

I bet this is what Nolan wants. Everyone going nuts over Two Face. Is he dead? Is he alive?

Nolan is watching... and laughing! :woot:

[ArcXIX]

:woot:

[donk70]

Success isn't generated by recognition. What do you think the general public thought of Joker, Penguin, Catwoman, and Riddler when they were first shown on Adam West's show? "Ooh, I LOVE those guys"? No. I bet half of them didn't even know they existed. But as they watched the show, they became intrigued and eventually grew to like them.

What we would call successful and what WB would call successful are two different things. WB measures success in dollar signs while we measure success in movie quality.


I completely disagree. Audiences are gained by a "hook". I think if Mr. Freeze were done right, utilizing amazing visuals related to his freezing capabilities, it would bring in a much bigger audience than either of those 3.Honestly, for Mr. Freeze to be adapted the the Nolanverse, it would take such a different type of character that it would barely resemble the canon Freeze.



I think you're undermining quite a bit of what that team brought to the mythos. I admit, I grew up on this cartoon, but I'm not the type of person to like something purely because of a childhood love. I've watched many shows and movies that I watched and adored as a kid, but I've simply grown out of that phase. In relation to the Batman world, I "loved" Adam West's show and B&R. Now? I think their quality is not up to snuff in the least.

Timm and co. on the other hand, I've consistently been a fan of. You honestly think their changes to Freeze and Clayface in particular, were for the worse, just because they deviated from the source material?

I understand complete what those two brought to the table and quite frankly, it wasn't all that. They deviated from alot of things, but I suppose that DC/WB is really to blame for giving them the licensing to do this. Unfortunately, I don't think you understand how special the Batman/Detective/Killing Joke/TDKR comics of the 80's were prior to B89 and BTAS.

[Agentsands77]

Well all this is irrelevant. We pretty much know how it goes down in THE DARK KNIGHT, and that's that. I don't mind the decision, some of you fellas do. I imagine once some of you folks have seen the actual film, it'll be less of an issue.

[David Rice]

Honestly, for Mr. Freeze to be adapted the the Nolanverse, it would take such a different type of character that it would barely resemble the canon Freeze.

Give him a weapon that shoots liquid nitrogen.

[Crook]

What we would call successful and what WB would call successful are two different things. WB measures success in dollar signs while we measure success in movie quality.
What type of success did you think I was referring to? If the majority of the audiences are drawn into these characters, that translates to seats in theaters, and in turn, money.

Lemme ask you this, did people really know who the hell Iron Man and Iron Monger were?

Honestly, for Mr. Freeze to be adapted the the Nolanverse, it would take such a different type of character that it would barely resemble the canon Freeze
I wasn't necessarily talking about Nolan. Even if I was, I don't see a necessity for too much change. It's not like he has any superpowers.

I understand complete what those two brought to the table and quite frankly, it wasn't all that. They deviated from alot of things, but I suppose that DC/WB is really to blame for giving them the licensing to do this.
You haven't answered the question. The whole point of me bringing up Dini and Timm was that they brought change to characters, but ultimately it was for the better, despite not following the source material.

Unfortunately, I don't think you understand how special the Batman/Detective/Killing Joke/TDKR comics of the 80's were prior to B89 and BTAS.
I fully understand their place in history of the mythos. I don't have to live that era to know this. And I have no idea how this has anything to do with the argument.

[Agentsands77]

As Crook says, TDK is mainly about Harvey, with a little bit of Two-Face thrown in.
There's not a distinction. They're the same thing. Two-Face is merely the extension of Harvey Dent, the climax of his arc. After that, he plateaus.

I would LOVE for there to be a returning villain in the Batman series - Magneto in X2 and Lex Luthor in Superman 2 have shown that it can be done without feeling like 'more of what we got'.
And I think from Nolan's perspective, the Joker was going to be that.

There are different themes to be explored - TDK is about the fall of Harvey Dent, BB3 could be about Batman attempting to rehabilitate, as covered in DKR.
Meh. Doesn't really interest me as a cinematic storyline.

As for interesting post-origin Two-Face stories: Dark Victory
It's a good story, but not because of Two-Face. It's Batman's arc, and the role of Robin, that make that story what it is. Otherwise, it's just a retread of THE LONG HALLOWEEN.

[itsthebatman]

Well all this is irrelevant. We pretty much know how it goes down in THE DARK KNIGHT, and that's that. I don't mind the decision, some of you fellas do. I imagine once some of you folks have seen the actual film, it'll be less of an issue.
But where would the fun be if we all agreed on everything?

[DarthSkywalker]

I wasn't necessarily talking about Nolan. Even if I was, I don't see a necessity for too much change. It's not like he has any superpowers.

Man uses ice as a weapon. Just saying...

[Gianakin_]

Man uses ice as a weapon. Just saying...

He doesn't conjure or manipulate ice, though. He has a gun.

[donk70]

What type of success did you think I was referring to? If the majority of the audiences are drawn into these characters, that translates to seats in theaters, and in turn, money.

Lemme ask you this, did people really know who the hell Iron Man and Iron Monger were?


They know Iron man, but not Monger. You also have to remember that it was the 1st big movie of the season and there was a lot of hype the last month or so prior to the movies release. Also, it has RDJ who's a popular actor and alot of special effects.


I wasn't necessarily talking about Nolan. Even if I was, I don't see a necessity for too much change. It's not like he has any superpowers.



No, he just has to keep his body core temp down to below freezing to survive. :whatever:



You haven't answered the question. The whole point of me bringing up Dini and Timm was that they brought change to characters, but ultimately it was for the better, despite not following the source material.
The fact is why did these two want to change these origins? Why did they feel the need to? Personally, I really don't see anything wrong with the canon origins, ecspecially for a cartoon that was geared towards tweens. I prefer the canon origins to those anyday.



I fully understand their place in history of the mythos. I don't have to live that era to know this. And I have no idea how this has anything to do with the argument.


Ok, then let me spell it out for you, and I'll put it in laymans terms so you can understand it: If it ain't broke, why try to fix it? The whole world is always trying to build a better mousetrap. Why wouldn't what was working in the comics not work or translate over to a cartoon? Christ, it's almost the same genre.
Understand what I mean now?

[donk70]

Man uses ice as a weapon. Just saying...
But what Crook's saying is that be uses devices for his advantage.

[Crook]

They know Iron man, but not Monger. You also have to remember that it was the 1st big movie of the season and there was a lot of hype the last month or so prior to the movies release. Also, it has RDJ who's a popular actor and alot of special effects.
So in other words a non-popular hero has a movie made about them that has enough other enticements that lure in audiences. Great, thanks for proving my point.

No, he just has to keep his body core temp down to below freezing to survive. :whatever:
Not really seeing how that's a huge deal considering what was seen in BB and what we know of TDK.

The fact is why did these two want to change these origins? Why did they feel the need to? Personally, I really don't see anything wrong with the canon origins, ecspecially for a cartoon that was geared towards tweens. I prefer the canon origins to those anyday.
Those 2 characters were a joke, posed to no threat, and had very little of the fanbase actually thinking they were good villains. BTAS changed that. You'd be hard-pressed to find people preferring the comic book origins.

Ok, then let me spell it out for you, and I'll put it in laymans terms so you can understand it: If it ain't broke, why try to fix it? The whole world is always trying to build a better mousetrap. Why wouldn't what was working in the comics not work or translate over to a cartoon? Christ, it's almost the same genre.
I'd be inclined to agree, but that doesn't change the artist's right to change things as he sees fit. Whether it's ultimately for the better is up for debate.

[DarthSkywalker]

But what Crook's saying is that be uses devices for his advantage.

It doesn't matter what he uses when the character is built around ice and its as a weapon.

[donk70]

So in other words a non-popular hero has a movie made about them that has enough other enticements that lure in audiences. Great, thanks for proving my point.

Not hardly. RDJ, Gweneth Paltrow, Terrence Stamp, and Jeff Bridges were the real selling points of this film. 3/4 Oscar nominees doesn't make a bad cast.

Nice try

Not really seeing how that's a huge deal considering what was seen in BB and what we know of TDK.


Don't try to justify your argument assuming that I agree with everything in BB and TDK, cause I dont. and for future refernce, don't assume that I like the Burton Shumacher era either.

Nice try, strawman


Those 2 characters were a joke, posed to no threat, and had very little of the fanbase actually thinking they were good villains. BTAS changed that. You'd be hard-pressed to find people preferring the comic book origins.
Think again. You admitted that you grew up with the cartoon while I grew up with the comic. Better go back and reread my comments that says the one that I prefer. Again, why try to fix something that isn't broke?

It's about a comic book/cartoon character. It doesn't have to make sense. That's the whole downfall the the Nolanverse, IMO. He's trying to make it seem like Batman is really alive. He's a character for cryin out loud. If I wanna see a crime drama, I'll watch the Godfather or any of my other faves. I wanna watch a movie about a comic book character.


I'd be inclined to agree, but that doesn't change the artist's right to change things as he sees fit. Whether it's ultimately for the better is up for debate


"Better up for debate?" You're kidding, right?

This is the basis for the whole BTAS part of the debate and why I don't like it. We have been debating it.

[Sunburned Hand]

Um, I was just wondering where these rumours about you-know-what have actually come from? Does anyone have a link, or something...

[Agentsands77]

Um, I was just wondering where these rumours about you-know-what have actually come from? Does anyone have a link, or something...
See here (http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=15140989&highlight=aicn#post15140989) for a rundown of the AICN stuff and here (http://chud.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2275462&postcount=114) for entertainment writer Devin's comments on the CHUD.com forums. TheMovieBlog's review (http://www.themovieblog.com/2008/06/the-dark-knight-review) also seems to speak to it.

[Crook]

Not hardly. RDJ, Gweneth Paltrow, Terrence Stamp, and Jeff Bridges were the real selling points of this film. 3/4 Oscar nominees doesn't make a bad cast.

Nice try

What part of "other enticements" did you not understand? Everything you just said is exactly what I was referring to.

Don't try to justify your argument assuming that I agree with everything in BB and TDK, cause I dont. and for future refernce, don't assume that I like the Burton Shumacher era either.

Nice try, strawman
I didn't assume crap. And I don't care what you like either. That statement had absolutely nothing to do with you. I was talking about the rules set by BB and how TDK extends that. Judging by that groundwork laid, I don't think Freeze is totally out of the question for existing in that world.

I have NO idea how you managed to twist that around and make it about you. :funny:

Think again. You admitted that you grew up with the cartoon while I grew up with the comic. Better go back and reread my comments that says the one that I prefer. Again, why try to fix something that isn't broke?
Again, this isn't about you. Regardless of whether you liked the comic book incarnations or not, at that point in time (90s), Freeze and Clayface were irrelevant and C-grade. Timm and Dini changed that.

It's about a comic book/cartoon character. It doesn't have to make sense. That's the whole downfall the the Nolanverse, IMO. He's trying to make it seem like Batman is really alive. He's a character for cryin out loud. If I wanna see a crime drama, I'll watch the Godfather or any of my other faves. I wanna watch a movie about a comic book character.
That's nice. :huh:

I have my problems with Nolan too, but I don't see what that has to do with his artistic license on the character.

"Better up for debate?" You're kidding, right?

This is the basis for the whole BTAS part of the debate and why I don't like it. We have been debating it.
Umm...ok?

[Antrax255]

Why are we talking as if we seen the movie and Nolan has destroyed our Two-Face. I'm sure after seeing the movie most of your opinions will change.

[Sunburned Hand]

See here (http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=15140989&highlight=aicn#post15140989) for a rundown of the AICN stuff and here (http://chud.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2275462&postcount=114) for entertainment writer Devin's comments on the CHUD.com forums. TheMovieBlog's review (http://www.themovieblog.com/2008/06/the-dark-knight-review) also seems to speak to it.

Thanks. I'm still in two minds about this, particularly the alleged manner of Two-Face's death - I mean, a fall from a great height? Is it me, or do I remember rightly that this has been done once - no, twice - already?

[Marx]

Why are we talking as if we seen the movie and Nolan has destroyed our Two-Face. I'm sure after seeing the movie most of your opinions will change.

Because some here like to believe that they are experts on all things Batman and Nolan...while others like to take "internet-land" rumors are run with them like there's no tomorrow. It's annoying...amusing...but incredibly annoying.

The only sure way to find out what happens is to ACTUALLY SEE THE MOVIE.

Until then, we are left with pointless rumor-milling and everyone arguing over why their rumors are more important and "factual" than everyone elses. :whatever:

[Gianakin_]

Why are we talking as if we seen the movie and Nolan has destroyed our Two-Face. I'm sure after seeing the movie most of your opinions will change.

Personally, I'm sure he'll do justice to him in TDK. It's his further potential that will be wasted.

[The Guard]

Batman has to make a huge sacrifice at the end of the movie because of Dent. This sacrifice adds to the mythos of Batman and shows why he is "the silent guardian, the Dark Knight."

Two-Face need not die for this angle/element to exist. Batman could still make the same "sacrifice"/gesture, and it would still have much the same meaning.

[Sunburned Hand]

The only sure way to find out what happens is to ACTUALLY SEE THE MOVIE.

Until then, we are left with pointless rumor-milling and everyone arguing over why their rumors are more important and "factual" than someone elses. :whatever:

Word.

[donk70]

[quote=Crook;15148695]What part of "other enticements" did you not understand? Everything you just said is exactly what I was referring to.
In this case the cast is primary and the story vehicle is the "other enticement". You could put this cast in Speed Racer and it would have done $300m domestically.


I didn't assume crap. And I don't care what you like either. That statement had absolutely nothing to do with you. I was talking about the rules set by BB and how TDK extends that. Judging by that groundwork laid, I don't think Freeze is totally out of the question for existing in that world.

I have NO idea how you managed to twist that around and make it about you. :funny:


Judging by Nolans own admission to wanting a "real" bat flick, it is. When was the last time that a human body could survive at sub zero temperatures, or need the temp. that low to survive?

You were saying that we should use what we know so far to accept Freezes possibility in the Nolanverse and I pointed out to you that I don't agree with everything in the Nolanverse, like that should the only reasoning that we need. Not hardly.


Again, this isn't about you. Regardless of whether you liked the comic book incarnations or not, at that point in time (90s), Freeze and Clayface were irrelevant and C-grade. Timm and Dini changed that.


And this isn't about you. Did you poll all of Bat-fandom to see which origin they prefer? Didn't think so. And FYI, Clayface and Mr. Freeze was used back in the late 80's. Hardly what I would call irrelevant or Cgrade, ehh?

I thought so

That's nice. :huh:

I have my problems with Nolan too, but I don't see what that has to do with his artistic license on the character.


It's a problem when he diviates too far from a character. Killing off a Arch villain does that.

Umm...ok?
:whatever:

[Joe Kerr]

This bickering is getting old... i keep coming to this thread, expecting some sort of news, only to see you two wasting text.

[donk70]

This bickering is getting old... i keep coming to this thread, expecting some sort of news, only to see you two wasting text.
You're right. I'm done. We took this way off topic

Continue

[Marx]

This bickering is getting old... i keep coming to this thread, expecting some sort of news, only to see you two wasting text.

There are many more than two Joe. I've just about quit coming to the Batforums because of stuff like this.

[sasquatchs]

Judging by Nolans own admission to wanting a "real" bat flick, it is. When was the last time that a human body could survive at sub zero temperatures, or need the temp. that low to survive?

You were saying that we should use what we know so far to accept Freezes possibility in the Nolanverse and I pointed out to you that I don't agree with everything in the Nolanverse, like that should the only reasoning that we need. Not hardly.


Well there's this guy, not that it makes any difference

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Story?id=4393377&page=1

[regwec]

So, Raimi kills off Spidey villians and he's hounded for it.

Nolan kills off one of the most iconic villains (Yes, hes a villain.) and suddenly its a great idea? Wow, I like Nolan's films as much as the next person but some people seem to praise his every move blindly. This isn't directed at anyone in particular, just a general observation on the kind of behaviour I've seen on the hype. I'm aware I'll probably be labeled a hater or a Marvel Zombie or something equally childish now but I don't like what Nolan appears to be doing with Two-Face's character.

Having said that I have no doubt this film will be fantastic, probably an instant classic of the genre. I may even be wrong in my assumptions but isn't that what these boards are for? Speculation and sharing opinions?

I think it became clear, at least three years ago, that the movies are the only investment many people have in the Batman mythos, and that these people will cheer and celebrate anything that Christopher Nolan does.

[inflames]

Two-Face isn't a villain in this franchise.

[Marx]

Two-Face isn't a villain in this franchise.

You just proved everything that regwec just said.

[inflames]

You just proved everything that regwec just said.hostile.

[MiniBond]

I think it became clear, at least three years ago, that the movies are the only investment many people have in the Batman mythos, and that these people will cheer and celebrate anything that Christopher Nolan does.
In my case.......NOT- AT -ALL !


I don"t like the fights in BB and quite frankly Memento doesn't appeal to me !:cwink:


It's just that I see what's Nolan's point with killing two face, that's all........ ! It fits with his approach of the character , a fallen angel who is desperate at the end of the movie and got nothing to loose at all, not a villain...you guys are gonna need to get used to it, sorry to disappoint, Nolan was not Joking when he said that !!:o:o

[inflames]

In my case.......NOT- AT -ALL !


I don"t like the fights in BB and quite frankly Memento doesn't appeal to me !:cwink:


It's just that I see what's Nolan's point with killing two face, that's all........ ! It fits with his approach of the character , a fallen angel who is desperate at the end of the movie and got nothing to loose at all, not a villain...you guys are gonna need to get used to it, sorry to disappoint, Nolan was not Joking when he said that !!:o:oQFT, looks like this is turning into a comic book elitist kind of thing, I do read the graphic novels and I *get* what they are saying buy they are still saying Nolan is killing off a villain, hence my post ''two-face isn't a villain in this franchise''.

[regwec]

I don't "need" to "get used" to anything. I can accept it or reject it, as I please. People who feel they "need" to adjust to the vision, spoon-fed to them by a movie studio, lack self respect.

[Gallagher]

I think it became clear, at least three years ago, that the movies are the only investment many people have in the Batman mythos, and that these people will cheer and celebrate anything that Christopher Nolan does.

My thoughts exactly.

hostile.

"I'll show you hostile!"

[Figs]

I think the main reason why I'm not pissed(but I am a bit disappointed)that Two Face dies is some years ago I finally came to the realization as others have, that these films(all comic films) are someone else's interpretation.

I would love for Two Face to survive to expand on him in a sequel but I'm not going to let his death ruin the film for me. I'm going into this film watching it as a film not just a Batman film.

I do feel bad for the fans that aren't happy with him dying, especially since that's not the only change they've done with Dent/Two Face in this film that will upset fans.

[Marx]

I think the main reason why I'm not pissed(but I am a bit disappointed)that Two Face dies is some years ago I finally came to the realization as others have, that these films(all comic films) are someone else's interpretation.

I would love for Two Face to survive to expand on him in a sequel but I'm not going to let his death ruin the film for me. I'm going into this film watching it as a film not just a Batman film.

I do feel bad for the fans that aren't happy with him dying, especially since that's not the only change they've done with Dent/Two Face in this film that will upset fans.

I have a very difficult time finding sympathy for some because of the constant need to bash anything that isn't their own vision.

Ultimately, no movie ever will please everyone. There will always be something for someone to tear apart.

[MiniBond]

well I also get what they are saying precisely because I was on their side just a few hours ago....it's just that in the meantime I sat down, thought about it, tried to picture it and I must say...............this rocks........in that way Two face has nothing to envy from the grand greek tragedies' characters !!!!

It's as simple as that !!! I know that two face would have been great in another movie, he could have done it, absolutely !! :cwink::cwink: It's just not the way Nolan chose simply because that's not how he defines the character !

[inflames]

I don't "need" to "get used" to anything. I can accept it or reject it, as I please. People who feel they "need" to adjust to the vision, spoon-fed to them my a movie studio, lack self respect.oh BS x2 regwec just because I like Nolan's different interpretation just as much as I like the one in the comics and graphic novels does not make me or anyone else a tool for the movie studio/Nolan and even if I have never read any batman comics or novels and had only been exposed to it by TV or movies SO WHAT?! I would be inferior to you is what I guess you are trying to say.

[MiniBond]

I don't "need" to "get used" to anything. I can accept it or reject it, as I please. People who feel they "need" to adjust to the vision, spoon-fed to them by a movie studio, lack self respect.


I'm not gonna force anyone...it's just that this version of two face's end is not something that is coming out of nowhere....it fits with Dent's character throughout the movie.....that said it's the minimum we can do by accepting that Nolan's vision is at least clear about things !!!

[The Sage]

I think it became clear, at least three years ago, that the movies are the only investment many people have in the Batman mythos, and that these people will cheer and celebrate anything that Christopher Nolan does.

:up::up::up:

[Gallagher]

:up::up::up:

Whooooo indeed :up:

[David Rice]

Because some here like to believe that they are experts on all things Batman and Nolan...while others like to take "internet-land" rumors are run with them like there's no tomorrow. It's annoying...amusing...but incredibly annoying.

The only sure way to find out what happens is to ACTUALLY SEE THE MOVIE.

Until then, we are left with pointless rumor-milling and everyone arguing over why their rumors are more important and "factual" than everyone elses. :whatever:

Thank you.

[namtaB]

I think it became clear, at least three years ago, that the movies are the only investment many people have in the Batman mythos, and that these people will cheer and celebrate anything that Christopher Nolan does.

Somewhat agree. My link to the Batman mythos formed as a kid after watching B89. But you're right in the sense that my only investment in the Batman mythos is through the films. I don't read the comics at all and watched the animated series sporadically at best. I don't necessarily agree with anything Nolan does, ie. I would've preferred Joker to be permawhite and still think they missed the boat on that. But I think his choices work for the story he tells. Since the films are the only connection I have to Batman I have an overall positive view of what Nolan has done.

[Agentsands77]

I don't agree with everything Nolan does. BEGINS was far from a perfect film.

But I do "get" this narrative choice. It makes sense to me, especially in the context of the individual film. I think what potential Nolan has sacrificed in terms of the character's future is worth the gain in dramatic power.

[inlers87]

I just wrote this on the other two face thread but this one seems more appropriate:

Although I hardly ever actually post, I've frequented these boards for years and thoroughly enjoy listening to like-minded individuals argue the finer points of some of our favorite franchises. That being said, I have to get in on this.

Where, if anyone knows, did these rumors originate? I've looked everyone in this thread and the most I've found is "I heard..."

Any help?

[Rikxiepoo]

There are some people, such as myself, that like it when they change some things when adapting a comic book to a movie, such as the permawhite Joker change to makeup Joker, because it makes the movie more believable. I mean, if they were to do Bane in this verse, I would prefer they made him some bulked up guy that took some adrenaline shots to make himself more energetic instead of some guy that had a constant supply of "venom" pumped into his body to give him superhuman strength. Same thing goes for this version of Harvey Two Face. Makes more of a realistic sense to have him as a murderous vigilante than a lawyer turned bank robber and villain just because he got acid thrown on him. I like the old Batman fims, but there are some pretty unbelievable things that happen in them that kinda ruin moments in the film for me (like the real penguins raising Oswald or catwoman being born because she had many cats crawl all over her after she fell from the building).

[Agentsands77]

I just wrote this on the other two face thread but this one seems more appropriate:

Although I hardly ever actually post, I've frequented these boards for years and thoroughly enjoy listening to like-minded individuals argue the finer points of some of our favorite franchises. That being said, I have to get in on this.

Where, if anyone knows, did these rumors originate? I've looked everyone in this thread and the most I've found is "I heard..."

Any help?
See here (http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=15140989&highlight=aicn#post15140989) for a rundown of the AICN stuff and here (http://chud.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2275462&postcount=114) for entertainment writer Devin's comments on the CHUD.com forums. TheMovieBlog's review (http://www.themovieblog.com/2008/06/the-dark-knight-review) also seems to speak to it.

[turtlefocker]

I don't agree with everything Nolan does. BEGINS was far from a perfect film.

But I do "get" this narrative choice. It makes sense to me, especially in the context of the individual film. I think what potential Nolan has sacrificed in terms of the character's future is worth the gain in dramatic power.

I agree.

I've been very open about my complaints about BB (fight scenes, unmemorable villains) and TDK (lack of perma-white, cut smile - I'd of rather of had a comic-accurate joker) but I think Two Face dieing works in this film from what Ive read, but then I wasn't against Ra's death in BB and many were.

[inlers87]

See here (http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=15140989&highlight=aicn#post15140989) for a rundown of the AICN stuff and here (http://chud.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2275462&postcount=114) for entertainment writer Devin's comments on the CHUD.com forums. TheMovieBlog's review (http://www.themovieblog.com/2008/06/the-dark-knight-review) also seems to speak to it.

Thanks you very much sir.

I don't like "settling" with something Hollywood "shoves" down our throats, but I really don't see this as being like that. I've read Batman for awhile so I guess I'm just used to people tweaking different characters constantly. To me, with what we've seen so far, and considering how much character development we KNOW is given to Dent, this fits. It is tragic and I honestly think it's going to do alot for the genre. I think comic book movies, after this, are going to garner a great deal of respect. Remember how every comic movie that came out after BB described itself as being "in the vein of Batman Begins?" I think we're gonna get that again, only to the nth degree. If this rumor is true, it is a part of a bigger picture, i believe, and not jsut some rushed detail.

[sclabguy]

okay someone please give me a credible source saying that twoface dies

[Marx]

okay someone please give me a credible source saying that twoface dies

There are none. It's nothing but people running with "internet-land" rumors.

[sclabguy]

yeah exactly what i thought it was... thanks

[Agentsands77]

There are none.
Wrong. Devin of CHUD stated that it was the case, and if he doesn't count as a reliable source, I don't know what does.

[Marx]

yeah exactly what i thought it was... thanks

No problem man.

For every rumor spun about Two-Face dying, there is another saying he ends up being locked up in Arkham.

[Agentsands77]

For every rumor spun about Two-Face dying, there is another saying he ends up being locked up in Arkham.
For the former, there are a good number of sources (and at least one very reliable source, at that). For the latter, I have yet to see a single source, much less a single seemingly valid source. If you'd care to provide one, I'd be much obliged.

[sclabguy]

Wrong. Devin of CHUD stated that it was the case, and if he doesn't count as a reliable source, I don't know what does.

oh yeah thats "real" credible

[Agentsands77]

oh yeah thats "real" credible
Like the guy or not (and I don't, for what it's worth), he's reliable. And he saw the film. There's no real reason to dismiss his honestly shared comments regarding what takes place in the film beyond absurd fanboy prejudice.

[metalhead_dave]

I gotta stay away from these boards for now on but I just can't.:cmad:

I'm pissed, but not because of what happens, but because that I KNOW what happens. I think I'm going to need to stay in the Dark when it comes to everything else... though I'll be happy to view this thread now unless I start getting gritty details.

Dammit, must... resist...

[Da_Dent]

any word on what type of coin harvey uses? i've been curious about this for awhile now. in the comics and batman forever its a morgan liberty dollar (or some variation) but seeing as those haven't been made since the very early 1900s and a double sided one is pretty much impossible to find (i've been looking) i'm guessing its a more modern coin

[BatSpider]

oh yeah thats "real" credible
um, he reviews movies for the website, so its real

[namtaB]

any word on what type of coin harvey uses? i've been curious about this for awhile now. in the comics and batman forever its a morgan liberty dollar (or some variation) but seeing as those haven't been made since the very early 1900s and a double sided one is pretty much impossible to find (i've been looking) i'm guessing its a more modern coin

Its rumored to be a family heirloom of sorts handed down from his grandfather and father. So I expect it to be a turn of the 20th century coin.

[ArcXIX]

:woot:

[David Rice]

Wrong. Devin of CHUD stated that it was the case, and if he doesn't count as a reliable source, I don't know what does.

Why is he a reliable source? He's just another guy.

[xero1186]

IF two face dying is true

I give that a big :down

The main reason is because it makes such a colorful, GROWING universe for DC much smaller by eliminating such a pivotal character.

[xero1186]

IF two face dying is true

I give that a big :down

The main reason is because it makes such a colorful, GROWING universe for DC much smaller by eliminating such a pivotal character.

[David Rice]

um, he reviews movies for the website, so its real

That doesn't really mean anything.

[Omega Wizard]

Where? He doesn't state anything like this at all in his disrespectful (to Ledger) rant that went up.
There was nothing disrespectful about it :huh:

And around page 3 is where he says it.

[omid17]

IF two face dying is true

I give that a big :down

The main reason is because it makes such a colorful, GROWING universe for DC much smaller by eliminating such a pivotal character.agreed

[Omega Wizard]

That doesn't really mean anything.
CHUD is one of the biggest movie sites on the internet....

[ArcXIX]

:woot:

[LiveWire777]

IF two face dying is true

I give that a big :down

The main reason is because it makes such a colorful, GROWING universe for DC much smaller by eliminating such a pivotal character.
It would be like what Spiderman 3 did to Venom i think and god knows none of us want that.

[David Rice]

CHUD is one of the biggest movie sites on the internet....

So? Look, with this many people saying he dies I believe he does, but to say he's a reliable source is just dumb. This is the internet.

[ArcXIX]

:woot:

[omid17]

don't worry about the movie comes out in 19 days:up:

[David Rice]

It would be like what Spiderman 3 did to Venom i think and god knows none of us want that.

Not necessarily, it depends on how the movie plays. Eddie is pretty much a useless character, but you make him into Venom and he gets a lot more interesting.

[Agentsands77]

Why is he a reliable source? He's just another guy.
Why isn't he reliable? He's an entertainment writer who's pretty well known in movie news circles. This is what he does as a living. He even appears on television occasionally as a movie reviewer. He saw the film. What more do you want?

Seriously, the degree of skepticism some folks have. :whatever:

[redfirebird2008]

CHUD is one of the biggest toilet bowls on the internet....

FIFY.

[Axtech]

IF two face dying is true

I give that a big :down

The main reason is because it makes such a colorful, GROWING universe for DC much smaller by eliminating such a pivotal character.

I don't really think the DC movie universe is growing in that way. In fact, once Nolan is finished his run, I imagine any future Batman movies will have nothing to do with these movies. Just as the JLA movie isn't in the same continuity, future post-Nolan movies won't be either.

Think of it this way: Nolan is essentially doing a non-canon run of graphic novels. I much prefer this conception of comic book movies, since the alternative seems to result in fanboys arguing about whether or not an interpretation is "definitive" or accurate enough.

Although I'm quite disappointed with this apparent turn of events, I'll reserve judgment until after I see the movie. Given Nolan's record for storytelling, it will probably make perfect sense in context.

[Marx]

Why isn't he reliable? He's an entertainment writer who's pretty well known in movie news circles. This is what he does as a living. He even appears on television occasionally as a movie reviewer. He saw the film. What more do you want?

Seriously, the degree of skepticism some folks have. :whatever:

In the age of the internet, you should always maintain a level of skepticism Agentsands.

[David Rice]

don't worry about the movie comes out in 19 days:up:

18

; )

[David Rice]

Why isn't he reliable? He's an entertainment writer who's pretty well known in movie news circles. This is what he does as a living. He even appears on television occasionally as a movie reviewer. He saw the film. What more do you want?

Seriously, the degree of skepticism some folks have. :whatever:

It's not skepticism, I already started that with this many people saying the same thing I buy it, but when it first came out I didn't.

And the reasons that where given for the guy being a reliable source were just lame.

[David Rice]

In the age of the internet, you should always maintain a level of skepticism Agentsands.

Yes. Thank you sir.

[Agentsands77]

In the age of the internet, you should always maintain a level of skepticism Agentsands.
Indeed you should. The internet's got crazy stuff floating all around. But there are sources worth more skepticism than others, and you can occasionally find a source you can reasonably put a degree of faith in. I've been reading Devin for a long time. If I hadn't been familiar with the guy for so long, I might be more skeptical... but this isn't a guy who's going to make crap up. Especially not when he's trying to build up his validity regarding THE DARK KNIGHT.

Seriously, I lose brain cells every time I post on this forum.

[Marx]

Indeed you should. The internet's got crazy stuff floating all around. But there are sources worth more skepticism than others, and you can occasionally find a source you can reasonably put a degree of faith in. I've been reading Devin for a long time. If I hadn't been familiar with the guy for so long, I might be more skeptical... but this isn't a guy who's going to make crap up. Especially not when he's trying to build up his validity regarding THE DARK KNIGHT. Seriously, I lose brain cells every time I post on this forum.

I can agree with that. That being said though, it is still the internet. (No matter how 'reliable' the source may claim to be.)

[Marx]

double post

[Agentsands77]

That being said though, just because it is on the internet doesn't make it true.
I haven't seen anyone apply that level of reasoning. Of course not everything written on the internet is true. That's obvious.

(No matter how 'reliable' the source may claim to be.)
It's not about how reliable Devin claims to be. The guy does have a track record. He's offensive, has bold opinions, and rubs people the wrong way (including me). But I don't believe he's the kind of guy to spit out crap, especially in this case.

[Marx]

I haven't seen anyone apply that level of reasoning. Of course not everything written on the internet is true. That's obvious.


I didn't mean to imply that you followed that mentality.


It's not about how reliable Devin claims to be. The guy does have a track record. He's offensive, has bold opinions, and rubs people the wrong way (including me). But I don't believe he's the kind of guy to spit out crap, especially in this case.

I can respect that. I'm just saying that, track record or not, everyone is capable of allowing their own personal feelings to dictate what they want to write, report, or post.

I just find it funny how alot of people feed the rumor-mill and then proceed into an argument over whose rumor and source is more reliable and factual. (As I've said before.)

[xero1186]

I don't really think the DC movie universe is growing in that way. In fact, once Nolan is finished his run, I imagine any future Batman movies will have nothing to do with these movies. Just as the JLA movie isn't in the same continuity, future post-Nolan movies won't be either.

Think of it this way: Nolan is essentially doing a non-canon run of graphic novels. I much prefer this conception of comic book movies, since the alternative seems to result in fanboys arguing about whether or not an interpretation is "definitive" or accurate enough.

Although I'm quite disappointed with this apparent turn of events, I'll reserve judgment until after I see the movie. Given Nolan's record for storytelling, it will probably make perfect sense in context.

Even if the DC universe is going in that direction it would be nice to see Gotham and Batman grow in that direction.

It just feels like the only reason to kill two-face is to obtain a very unnecessary sense of closure. Now, I understand that Nolan does these films one by one with no real insight to whether or not he'll do another. It just feels like a cop out. I just get the vibe that his decision(if it's true) is to say with two-face dead I have the option to stop here. I understand that to let him live would make everything feel very open ended but I would much prefer that be the case.

[Axtech]

I'm gonna throw this all in spoiler tabs just so it's not too obvious what we're discussing, haha

I definitely agree, and I'd much rather see Two-Face survive. But in the end, I think it could work for the movie depending on how it's done and what exactly goes down. And though it means we probably won't see Two-Face in another Nolan movie, it certainly doesn't mean we'll never see him done right on-screen again.

[xero1186]

I'm gonna throw this all in spoiler tabs just so it's not too obvious what we're discussing, haha

I definitely agree, and I'd much rather see Two-Face survive. But in the end, I think it could work for the movie depending on how it's done and what exactly goes down. And though it means we probably won't see Two-Face in another Nolan movie, it certainly doesn't mean we'll never see him done right on-screen again.

Well, here's what it really comes down to for me. It's a lose/lose situation where 1. Nolan comes back to make a 3rd and then there's no sign of 2 face in it (if only for a scene like crane's is supposed to be like) and 2. Nolan doesn't make a 3rd film and we see the end of Batman movies for a little while.

[Robin91939]

I have no problem if Harvey's death plays out like it does in Dark Victory. If he is seen falling to a near certain death and there is a conversation between Batman and Gordon about being as sure that Harvey is dead without seeing a body. I don't need to see a shot of Harvey living safe and sound like in Dark Victory but I think it's handled pretty well in that story. And wouldn't mind something similar, IF HE HAS TO DIE.

If there is a funeral where we see a body, as rumored- I can live with it- if the story of Harvey Dent/Two-Face is done properly, but best case scenario, for me, is that he is presumed dead but can return...


Also- how does Batman take responsibility for Two-face's crimes? Does he release a statement through Gordon? A letter ala the end of Batman? How would Batman communicate with the public like that?

Or....is it just assumed that Batman did these terrible deeds and Bruce has no intention of clearing his name in an attempt to save Harvey's image.

Then again- if Harvey is now dead, Gordon certainly doesn't like Harvey anymore (on account that Two-face murders members of his family), and Rachel is dead so its not like Bruce is protecting Harvey's image for her sake.....why does he take the wrap for it all?

I know the thing is Bruce wants Gotham to keep their hope that someone could be incorruptible, and he wants them to believe that Harvey never went rogue. So maybe they could accept another White Knight if one were to ever arrive one day in Gotham- but can't that now be Batman? Since Bruce now knows that he has to be Batman indefinitely- wouldn't he want to be seen as that beacon of light considering he's still alive and the last hope for Gotham?

-R

[Bat-Mite]

Gary Oldman kind of just threw a wrench into this whole "Omg, Harvey is dead!" thing. Towards the end of this (http://3news.co.nz/FullinterviewwithGaryOldmanonTheDarkKnight/tabid/337/articleID/61380/cat/89/Default.aspx?articleID=61380#video) video, he talks about Batman having to hunt Harvey down in the third one (or vice versa, it's difficult to tell from the way he words it). But the important thing is, he's saying Harvey is alive.

[KILLING JOKER]

Gary Oldman kind of just threw a wrench into this whole "Omg, Harvey is dead!" thing. Towards the end of this (http://3news.co.nz/FullinterviewwithGaryOldmanonTheDarkKnight/tabid/337/articleID/61380/cat/89/Default.aspx?articleID=61380#video) video, he talks about Batman having to hunt Harvey down in the third one (or vice versa, it's difficult to tell from the way he words it). But the important thing is, he's saying Harvey is alive.

Ummm, he's talking about Batman.

[Bat-Mite]

Ummm, he's talking about Batman.Yeah, I figured that was the case, since it wouldn't make much sense if it were the other way around. lol. But like I said, he worded it strangely.

[KILLING JOKER]

Yeah, I figured that was the case, since it wouldn't make much sense if it were the other way around. lol. But like I said, he worded it strangely.

I wish you were right though...lol

[Batman jr.]

Not necessarily, it depends on how the movie plays. Eddie is pretty much a useless character, but you make him into Venom and he gets a lot more interesting.


I'm not a big fan of the demise of a certain character, but all these comparisons with SM:3 are starting to get annoying. One guy says that it's like Eddie/Venom and automatically it means it'll be excatly like that???

Don't you think that he was talking about the amount of screentime for TF?

Even if it isn't like Heat or The Godfather, TDK will be 1000 times better than the huge pile of stupid dancing-BS SM:3 was.

[HopeOfTheFuture]

Two-Face dying is somehow realistic. I mean, with no medication or treatment against such a facial wounds, I wonder how long someone would live in the realistic Nolan world.

[Batman jr.]

Two-Face dying is somehow realistic. I mean, with no medication or treatment against such a facial wounds, I wonder how long someone would live in the realistic Nolan world.


Well, at least he won't be electrocuted and replaced by Christoper Walken
or act a Joker/Jim Carrey-copy...

[namtaB]

Two-Face dying is somehow realistic. I mean, with no medication or treatment against such a facial wounds, I wonder how long someone would live in the realistic Nolan world.

True. Severe burn victims are always kept in a sterile environment. Dent wouldn't last long without an infection.

[Gianakin_]

Two-Face dying is somehow realistic. I mean, with no medication or treatment against such a facial wounds, I wonder how long someone would live in the realistic Nolan world.

Oh, he'd live. Because Nolan's world isn't realistic.

[Anita18]

Re: Two-Face's fate and all of the hubbub despite the immensely positive reviews....

Nobody seems to care except for people who haven't seen the film yet. :hehe: (Meaning, us LOL.)

[Keymaker]

Two-Face dying is somehow realistic. I mean, with no medication or treatment against such a facial wounds, I wonder how long someone would live in the realistic Nolan world.
That's actually a good way to look at it. I had a little problem with him not having any infections and how Nolan would allow it to be that way...I guess Nolan figured out how to get away with it + have a very powerful ending at the same time. FTW! :woot:

[cultstatus]

He doesnt die from his burns, he gets shot.

[Marx]

He doesnt die from his burns, he gets shot.

So let's get all of this straight...

Two-Face dies from a fall off of a building.

Two-Face dies from falling off of a scaffolding.

Two-Face dies in a car accident.

Two-Face dies by gunshot.

Two-Face lives and is on the run.

Two-Face lives and is locked up in Arkham with Joker and Scarecrow.

Ugh...I really can't take this pointless spinning of the rumor-mill. Maybe I'll just come back to the TDK threads after the movie is released. I've heard that's the best way to find out what is going on. You know, actually seeing the movie. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

[BatmanGoesToRio]

Ugh...I really can't take this pointless spinning of the rumor-mill. Maybe I'll just come back to the TDK threads after the movie is released. I've heard that's the best way to find out what is going on. You know, actually seeing the movie.

Well said, friend. I'm getting tired of it, too, and I completely agree.

[ACDC1989]

I seriously cannot wait to see Two-Face as he was and still is one of my favourite Batman villians.

[omid17]

Huge Spoiler

i know he doesn't die in a car accident, because in that scene he's in the car and he flips the coin and lands on heads, and he tells the mob boss your lucky, than flips the coin agian and lands on tails, and he say but your driver isn't lucky or something like that, and that's when car goes outa control

[The Caped Knight]

Aaron Interviews on Harvey Dent/Two Face for TDK
6XzwDDnZOyY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XzwDDnZOyY

HsVhKR4ri4k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsVhKR4ri4k

[regwec]

Two-Face dying is somehow realistic. I mean, with no medication or treatment against such a facial wounds, I wonder how long someone would live in the realistic Nolan world.
*Walks into study with single malt and service revolver*

[ManchesterCityX]

So Two Face get's Venom'd?

First thing a disagree with in the new Batman films. :csad:

[Crook]

Ok, I just stepped into this thread for an update, but why the hell are there like 4 explanations for Harvey's you-know-what? :huh:

[SuperBatman]

So Two Face get's Venom'd?

First thing a disagree with in the new Batman films. :csad:

The thing is people don't seem to be so upset about it because you get 30 min of Two Face rather then getting atleast 10 maybe 15 min of Venom's Character people are saying Nolan did it better.

[Agentsands77]

AICN's Moriarty (the best reviewer and writer on that site) just confirmed that Two Face dies. You clearly see him die, you see the body, and you see the funeral. See here (http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=15157370&postcount=2449).

[MiniBond]

:cwink:are we sure it's THE moriarty ?????:woot:

[Agentsands77]

:cwink:are we sure it's THE moriarty ?????:woot:
I know you're be facetious, but lest anyone take you seriously, yeah, we are.

[Prison Mike]

AICN's Moriarty (the best reviewer and writer on that site) just confirmed that Two Face dies. You clearly see him die, you see the body, and you see the funeral. See here (http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=15157370&postcount=2449).

do you know how?

[turtlefocker]

The thing is people don't seem to be so upset about it because you get 30 min of Two Face rather then getting atleast 10 maybe 15 min of Venom's Character people are saying Nolan did it better.

The treatment of Venom was the biggest flaw of Spider man 3 in my opinion. I can get past the dancing - I can get passed the crying - but not Venom's treatment.

For one Eddie had barely any screen time so I didn't give a **** about his character, two he didn't even call himself Venom, and three he had maybe 5 minutes of screen time.

Let me state this clearly: Two-Face dies. It happens on-camera. We see his body. We see his funeral. And his death changes everything for Gotham and Batman, and the end of the film... in fact, the TITLE of the film... hinges on Harvey's death and the subsequent cover-up of the truth about it.

Thanks Moriarty!

Your review was absolutely amazing by the way. Convinced me to see Hellboy II even though I disliked the first one.

http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif TDK is going to be amazing - and Two-Face is not getting the Venom treatment IMO...

[MiniBond]

I know you're be facetious, but lest anyone take you seriously, yeah, we are.
ok just wanted to check !

[SuperBatman]

The treatment of Venom was the biggest flaw of Spider man 3 in my opinion. I can get past the dancing - I can get passed the crying - but not Venom's treatment.

For one Eddie had barely any screen time so I didn't give a **** about his character, two he didn't even call himself Venom, and three he had maybe 5 minutes of screen time.



Thanks Moriarty!

Your review was absolutely amazing by the way. Convinced me to see Hellboy II even though I disliked the first one.

http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif TDK is going to be amazing - and Two-Face is not getting the Venom treatment IMO...

True plus add in the Fact that Harvey Dent seems to be in a lot of the Film when Eddie Brock was only in a few scenes.

[Gianakin_]

Well.... all I can say for the franchise is "s**t". I'm sure I'll enjoy TDK to the maximum, but s**t nonetheless.

[bonesawmcgraw]

All Hail Moriarty

[TheDreamMaster]

After hearing the spoilers, I have to say that I'm a bit disappointed. Whatever happened to the Joker supposedly being a part of Batman 3 set against the backdrop of Two-Face being on the streets? Maybe it was idol fan speculation etc., but I swear Nolan or someone high up made mention of it...

[omid17]

im glad to hear the Aaron E. played a great Harvey and Two-Face

[Closerframe]

After hearing the spoilers, I have to say that I'm a bit disappointed. Whatever happened to the Joker supposedly being a part of Batman 3 set against the backdrop of Two-Face being on the streets? Maybe it was idol fan speculation etc., but I swear Nolan or someone high up made mention of it...

It was David Goyer, who made this claim. But he said this before Nolan and Jonan even wrote the script. So no one should be getting mad over a bunch of speculation, just enjoy one movie Nolan makes at a time.

[Cory]

i hope all this turns out to be ******** twoface has to be movie 3. who the hell else are we gonna get, penquin? catwoman? :whatever:

[Gianakin_]

Unfortunately, it's not bulls**t. And since we won't get 2Face in no3, Catwoman would probably be the best choice for it.

[Cory]

id rather there not be a third then have freakin catwoman or penquin.

damn. you cant go from scarecrow, to joker, catwoman or penquin.

i know i havent seen the movie, but nolan pissed in his wheaties with this one. cause regardless of how u look at it, if joker gets replaced for 3, fans will raise hell. if this twoface stuff is true(ill believe it when i see it) people will raise hell about that. saying he was venomed.

however, if the joker kills twoface ill be happy to an extent.

[DeaDheaD]

Maybe there isnt going to be a third movie.

[Gianakin_]

id rather there not be a third then have freakin catwoman or penquin.

damn. you cant go from scarecrow, to joker, catwoman or penquin.

You can go to Catwoman, Riddler and the Al Ghul family, though.

[Cory]

catwoman just wouldnt work IMO. riddler either, riddler would be to much like joker in nolans world IMO. catwoman, eh.

to cap of the trilogy with any other villians than joker or twoface is just a crime to me.

[Cory]

well bale and oldman are signed to do a 3rd arent they?

[DeaDheaD]

I know Bale, Oldman, are signed for three movies, but that doesnt mean they are making three.

[Cory]

as much money as TDK looks to make, there will be a 3rd.

i mean wtf hahah i loved the whole twoface in the last 15 minutes setting up the third.

[DeaDheaD]

but if everyone gets killed off in the end, it sounds likeTDK would be "wrapping the franchise up"

[Cory]

eh maybe if joker is in the backwork pulling the strings riddler would be ok.

but seriously. it was pretty perfect having a twoface 3rd movie. with jokers whereabouts unknown. but i guess we'll see how it plays out :(

[Reflectionist]

Don't forget that Michael Caine interview from the recent video clips:

I asked [Christopher Nolan] about how the thuhd one, and he said, 'dahkah.'

[Gianakin_]

catwoman just wouldnt work IMO. riddler either, riddler would be to much like joker in nolans world IMO. catwoman, eh.

to cap of the trilogy with any other villians than joker or twoface is just a crime to me.

Why would the Riddler be too much like Joker? With the themes established in BB and continuing in TDK (plus certain events), Catwoman would be a very rational and interesting choice.

Now, don't get me wrong, 2Face dying is something I don't agree with at all, but since it's a fact, we've gotta move on. There are things left open for no3 as far as Batman is concerned, and there are villains that can be flesh those themes out.

[Gianakin_]

Don't forget that Michael Caine interview from the recent video clips:

I asked [Christopher Nolan] about how the thuhd one, and he said, 'dahkah.'

I thought Caine asked Nolan that question after BB wrapped, referring to the 2nd film.

[Cory]

i wont believe its a fact til i see it.

im not saying they are bad villains or anything... just horrible timing. you dont cap off a trilogy with, i guess the word is average, villains. following up 2face and joker....with freakin catwoman just ruins it for me haha

[Cory]

like the terminator franchise in a way....first villian Ahhnuld...2nd...the t1000...then the 3rd....the tx.....which the entire time i was like thats not a villain, its a sexgoddess...just take off your shirt...

just seems like the 3rd couldnt possibly live up to expectations with villians that, lets face it, are **** compared to joker and face.

[Closerframe]

The Dark Knight was actually Two-Faces film, so people shouldn't get angry that he may not be in the 3rd film (if there is even going to be) honestly it wouldn't make any sense to make a 3rd film. What would be the purpose? Batman is hated by everyone, hes alone, and he understands that he will always have to protect Gotham, since its his fault to what it has become. That is the perfect way to wrap it up. Catwoman or any other villain, would serve no purpose in deepening the story or continuing Batman's journey. It ended with Joker and Two-Face, Batman's best villains ended Nolan's series. Hopefully...

[Mr. Earle]

The Dark Knight was actually Two-Faces film, so people shouldn't get angry that he may not be in the 3rd film (if there is even going to be) honestly it wouldn't make any sense to make a 3rd film. What would be the purpose? Batman is hated by everyone, hes alone, and he understands that he will always have to protect Gotham, since its his fault to what it has become. That is the perfect way to wrap it up. Catwoman or any other villain, would serve no purpose in deepening the story or continuing Batman's journey. It ended with Joker and Two-Face, Batman's best villains ended Nolan's series. Hopefully...A third film will probably made. If you arent interested, then kindly, dont watch it. You can still enjoy the first 2 spiderman films without watching the 3rd.

So dont spoil it for the rest of us. You havent seen TDK yet. You dont know what nolan is planning for a sequel.

like the terminator franchise in a way....first villian Ahhnuld...2nd...the t1000...then the 3rd....the tx.....which the entire time i was like thats not a villain, its a sexgoddess...just take off your shirt...

just seems like the 3rd couldnt possibly live up to expectations with villians that, lets face it, are **** compared to joker and face.
People would have said the same thing about two-face. "Ooh its a stupid villain who flips a coin to decide whether or not to kill you" and look how Nolan handled him, how important he made Dent to Gotham and Bruce's quest. More than he ever was in the comics.

So you dont know who is going to be the next villain, how he will be handled, and what new aspect of his personality Nolan will focus on to make him important and symbolical. None of the villains in BB and TDK were handled like they are in the comics. So its premature to believe that the villains in the third film will be bland evil goons that batman will just punch.

[namtaB]

Do you really think Nolan will leave with so many questions unanswered?

- How will the final batcave look?
- How does the new batmobile come about and what does it look like?
- How will the reconstruction of Wayne manor pan out?
- What does Reese do with the information he's found out?
- Will Batman redeem himself in the public eye?
- Does Bruce move on from Rachel?
- What happens to Gordon and Batman now?
- Does Fox leave Wayne Enterprises permanently?

[Gianakin_]

Do you really think Nolan will leave with so many questions unanswered?

- How will the final batcave look?
- How does the new batmobile come about and what does it look like?
- How will the reconstruction of Wayne manor pan out?
- What does Reese do with the information he's found out?
- Will Batman redeem himself in the public eye?
- Does Bruce move on from Rachel?
- What happens to Gordon and Batman now?
- Does Fox leave Wayne Enterprises permanently?

Agreed 100%, the most iimportant of your points being Batman's redemption in they eyes of Gotham city. It's by no means a perfect way to end the current Bat-saga like this.

[Closerframe]

Do you really think Nolan will leave with so many questions unanswered?

- How will the final batcave look?
- How does the new batmobile come about and what does it look like?
- How will the reconstruction of Wayne manor pan out?
- What does Reese do with the information he's found out?
- Will Batman redeem himself in the public eye?
- Does Bruce move on from Rachel?
- What happens to Gordon and Batman now?
- Does Fox leave Wayne Enterprises permanently?

most of those questions can be left to the audiences judgment. Batman won't redeem himself in the public eye, in the comics the public eye labeled him an urban legend. No one has even seen the dark knight, so we don't even know if most of those questions could be answered before the films end. People will wish and think they know there will be a third film, but at this point its all speculation, no one knows what Nolan will do.

[Gianakin_]

People would have said the same thing about two-face. "Ooh its a stupid villain who flips a coin to decide whether or not to kill you" and look how Nolan handled him, how important he made Dent to Gotham and Bruce's quest. More than he ever was in the comics.

So you dont know who is going to be the next villain, how he will be handled, and what new aspect of his personality Nolan will focus on to make him important and symbolical. None of the villains in BB and TDK were handled like they are in the comics. So its premature to believe that the villains in the third film will be bland evil goons that batman will just punch.

No, they wouldn't have said the same thing about 2Face, he's the 2nd most important enemy (for some, he's the most important) of Batman.

And Nolan hasn't handled them exactly like the comics, but their characterisation is, for the msot part, pretty damn close, so that gives us a good indication of how the Riddler or Catwoman or whoever would be handled in a possible BB3.

[Mr. Earle]

Do you really think Nolan will leave with so many questions unanswered?

- How will the final batcave look?
- How does the new batmobile come about and what does it look like?
- How will the reconstruction of Wayne manor pan out?

Technical issues that Nolan isnt interested in. You really think he ll make a new film just to reconstruct the manor and the car?


Also, Nolan's Batman stories are more than simple detective stories about a dude in a batsuit solving riddles and punching bad guys. He sets moral questions, he binds characters together, he explores them, he develops them.

It would be interesting to see his batman evolve even more. At least he cares for his characters, he isnt making mindless action flicks. It would be folly to ask for another director or for Nolan to stop.

Because as good as B89 was, what was the problem Bruce ever faced? How to kick Joker's ass and whether or not to tell the reporter his identity. The reporter who vanished in thin air in the sequel, so problem solved.

Most comic book writers and fanboys dont have the ability to construct such a wonderful and convoluted story as Nolan has. Most of us would make a flick based on Batman's brooding personality, punches and riddle solving.

For me, Nolan does so much more than that.

[Gianakin_]

most of those questions can be left to the audiences judgment. Batman won't redeem himself in the public eye, in the comics the public eye labeled him an urban legend.

Why does his urban legend status exclude his redemption?

No one has even seen the dark knight, so we don't even know if most of those questions could be answered before the films end. People will wish and think they know there will be a third film, but at this point its all speculation, no one knows what Nolan will do.

Of course it's speculation, but you're saying a 3rd film isn't necessary and we disagree. And neither of us have seen the movie, so that puts you in the same place as us. Like you said, it's merely your speculation against ours.

[TLBorlando]

The Dark Knight was actually Two-Faces film, so people shouldn't get angry that he may not be in the 3rd film (if there is even going to be) honestly it wouldn't make any sense to make a 3rd film. What would be the purpose? Batman is hated by everyone, hes alone, and he understands that he will always have to protect Gotham, since its his fault to what it has become. That is the perfect way to wrap it up. Catwoman or any other villain, would serve no purpose in deepening the story or continuing Batman's journey. It ended with Joker and Two-Face, Batman's best villains ended Nolan's series. Hopefully...



You guys are crazy. Two-Face dying is a rumor at this point. Most bloggers are calling for Nolan's head after hearing about the rumor. Most are saying this is the last Batman movie Nolan will do. There WILL be a BB3, you can count on it. Will Nolan be behind the cameras? We don't know. He's responsible for reinventing the franchise and now he is being blamed for messing it up. Just by that account, he sounds like the Batman himself.

You can tell a great story in BB3; all it will take is brains, pens, and pads. A redemption theme for the Batman is right up my alley. So what if you won't be able to use one or two or three villains in it? Many of the other great "realisitic" villains can be used.

[TLBorlando]

The Dark Knight was actually Two-Faces film, so people shouldn't get angry that he may not be in the 3rd film (if there is even going to be) honestly it wouldn't make any sense to make a 3rd film. What would be the purpose? Batman is hated by everyone, hes alone, and he understands that he will always have to protect Gotham, since its his fault to what it has become. That is the perfect way to wrap it up. Catwoman or any other villain, would serve no purpose in deepening the story or continuing Batman's journey. It ended with Joker and Two-Face, Batman's best villains ended Nolan's series. Hopefully...



You guys are crazy. Two-Face dying is a rumor at this point. Most bloggers are calling for Nolan's head after hearing about the rumor. Most are saying this is the last Batman movie Nolan will do. There WILL be a BB3, you can count on it. Will Nolan be behind the cameras? We don't know. He's responsible for reinventing the franchise and now he is being blamed for messing it up. Just by that account, he sounds like the Batman himself.

You can tell a great story in BB3; all it will take is brains, pens, and pads. A redemption theme for the Batman is right up my alley. So what if you won't be able to use one or two or three villains in it? Many of the other great "realisitic" villains can be used.

[TLBorlando]

The Dark Knight was actually Two-Faces film, so people shouldn't get angry that he may not be in the 3rd film (if there is even going to be) honestly it wouldn't make any sense to make a 3rd film. What would be the purpose? Batman is hated by everyone, hes alone, and he understands that he will always have to protect Gotham, since its his fault to what it has become. That is the perfect way to wrap it up. Catwoman or any other villain, would serve no purpose in deepening the story or continuing Batman's journey. It ended with Joker and Two-Face, Batman's best villains ended Nolan's series. Hopefully...



You guys are crazy. Two-Face dying is a rumor at this point. Most bloggers are calling for Nolan's head after hearing about the rumor. Most are saying this is the last Batman movie Nolan will do. There WILL be a BB3, you can count on it. Will Nolan be behind the cameras? We don't know. He's responsible for reinventing the franchise and now he is being blamed for messing it up. Just by that account, he sounds like the Batman himself.

You can tell a great story in BB3; all it will take is brains, pens, and pads. A redemption theme for the Batman is right up my alley. So what if you won't be able to use one or two or three villains in it? Many of the other great "realisitic" villains can be used.

[Gianakin_]

You guys are crazy. Two-Face dying is a rumor at this point.

No, we're not. It's been confirmed by a valid and respected reviewer who was kind enough to make it 100% clear to us.

[Gianakin_]

Technical issues that Nolan isnt interested in. You really think he ll make a new film just to reconstruct the manor and the car?

namtaB didn't only make these points, don't take them out of context. A possible BB3 can have its theme and story and at the same time address the technical issues that Nolan LOVES to address.

[namtaB]

Technical issues that Nolan isnt interested in. You really think he ll make a new film just to reconstruct the manor and the car?


Also, Nolan's Batman stories are more than simple detective stories about a dude in a batsuit solving riddles and punching bad guys. He sets moral questions, he binds characters together, he explores them, he develops them.

It would be interesting to see his batman evolve even more. At least he cares for his characters, he isnt making mindless action flicks. It would be folly to ask for another director or for Nolan to stop.

Because as good as B89 was, what was the problem Bruce ever faced? How to kick Joker's ass and whether or not to tell the reporter his identity. The reporter who vanished in thin air in the sequel, so problem solved.

Most comic book writers and fanboys dont have the ability to construct such a wonderful and convoluted story as Nolan has. Most of us would make a flick based on Batman's brooding personality, punches and riddle solving.

For me, Nolan does so much more than that.

Thanks for taking my comments out of context. There's a strong redemption theme that can be explored just as much as fear and escalation. The issues with the cave, manor, batmobile are all peripheral however Nolan anally focuses on these technical issues and how they come about and what their purpose is so its asinine to say he's not interested in them.

[Mr. Earle]

No, they wouldn't have said the same thing about 2Face, he's the 2nd most important enemy (for some, he's the most important) of Batman.

And Nolan hasn't handled them exactly like the comics, but their characterisation is, for the msot part, pretty damn close, so that gives us a good indication of how the Riddler or Catwoman or whoever would be handled in a possible BB3.Half of Superhero Hype would argue that because the Joker isnt permawhite he isnt the Joker. Thus they could argue about Nolan's faith to the original medium.

Some could also consider Catwoman the second most important. Anyway...

All i am saying, is that faithfull or not, Nolan doesnt just take those villains and pit them against a brooding batman who eventually beats them up.
His stories are convoluted, his characters have many relationships and interractions, their acts are justified and they always go through expansive development. Development which isnt cheap, its sophisticated and well thought out.

Cause having Brando mumble some quote is cheap character development.

Its weird, but my anticipation for this movie isnt about watching the batpod stunts or the new suit. Its more about seeing how this story comes out. How batman and the other characters evolve and progress. I havent felt that for any other movie, cause i knew spiderman would prevail (his city wasnt teared to pieces with people being brutally murdered and his name tainted) and i was more interested in Tony's suit than his struggles.

So we dont know whether Nolan will do one more, or 3 more (maybe a cool idea hits him while making the third and he wants to see it through) and we certainly dont know where he will take Bruce and which villain he will use to guide Bruce's development. Last but not least, we certainly dont know how he would use an ambiguous character like Catwoman.
I would bet my head that it would be more than what Burton touched in BR.

[TLBorlando]

No, we're not. It's been confirmed by a valid and respected reviewer who was kind enough to make it 100% clear to us.


My point is, I'm not going to complain about it and call for Nolan's head if it turns out to be true. I'm not going to believe one respected reviewer until I see the film myself.

[TLBorlando]

geez, slow posting today

[TLBorlando]

what the ?

[Gianakin_]

Half of Superhero Hype would argue that because the Joker isnt permawhite he isnt the Joker. Thus they could argue about Nolan's faith to the original medium.

That's why I said he doesn't handle them exactly like the comics, but the matter we were talking about is their characterisation. We can't expect or predict how they'll be presented appearance-wise, but their characters and motives are similar to their comic counterparts, so we can take a shot at how he'll present Catwoman or the Riddler.

Some could also consider Catwoman the second most important. Anyway...

Well, I'm talking about the majority, of course. I agree with most of the rest of your post.

[Gianakin_]

My point is, I'm not going to complain about it and call for Nolan's head if it turns out to be true. I'm not going to believe one respected reviewer until I see the film myself.

Believing the particular plot element and complaining about it are 2 different points. Having gotten that out of the way:

1.I'll complain about it all I want, but I won't call for Nolan's head. Besides, the reason I'm complaining is mostly because Nolan might not return exactly because he killed 2Face off.

2.Don't believe one respected reviewer (or 3 or 5 or 10, because others have reported the same thing, too), it's certainly your right. Doesn't make it non-fact, though.

[Mr. Earle]

I dont know which reporter spoiled that and i frankly dont care. But you should consider the possibility that he is messing with us or that he got confused (Two-Face has staged his death many times).
I wouldnt like any villain to die of course (then having ten plastic surgeries and then being good, then bad, etc is stupid) but i wouldnt be so disappointed as long as Two-Face is well explored in this film.

But then, Two-Face is merely Dent seeking revenge and justice outside the law, not some deranged mobster, so in Nolan's story, there would be nowhere else to take him after he gets his revenge. Maybe he would commit suicide or rot in a cell.

I just dont want the joker to die, but then i think that he made all his points. As awesome as he might be, he will only give us awesome explosions in the third film and nothing more. Do we really need another story of him tempting batman to kill him and then batman barely restraining himself (oh, and his teeth falling off!). I guess not. Since Nolan is making 3 films, it would be wise to make a point at each film and not repeat himself. Thats why a new villain is needed in the third to shift the story towards another direction. The joker could still be used in providing awesomeness.

[Mr. Earle]

That's why I said he doesn't handle them exactly like the comics, but the matter we were talking about is their characterisation. We can't expect or predict how they'll be presented appearance-wise, but their characters and motives are similar to their comic counterparts, so we can take a shot at how he'll present Catwoman or the Riddler.



Well, I'm talking about the majority, of course. I agree with most of the rest of your post.I cant really measure how important Catwoman is for Bruce. But yeah i think that Dent is the second most important villain because of his ties to Batman when they were fighting crime together and his ties to Bruce Wayne (they were friends in BTAS, i dont know about the comics). Nolan made him even more important to Gotham because he was really the White Knight and he really changed things. He is also more important to Bruce because he could have been the person to make batman redundant.

[Gianakin_]

2Face is more than Dent going vigilante. Dent gets lost in 2Face, thus being able to provide at least 1-2 interesting stories.

And I want as much Joker as I can get. Main villain or not.

[Gianakin_]

I cant really measure how important Catwoman is for Bruce.

I'd say very.

[TLBorlando]

Believing the particular plot element and complaining about it are 2 different points. Having gotten that out of the way:

1.I'll complain about it all I want, but I won't call for Nolan's head. Besides, the reason I'm complaining is mostly because Nolan might not return exactly because he killed 2Face off.

2.Don't believe one respected reviewer (or 3 or 5 or 10, because others have reported the same thing, too), it's certainly your right. Doesn't make it non-fact, though.



I'm glad that you came to your senses. You are complaining because Nolan, and you typed it yourself, Nolan might not return to do a third Batman movie. The words MIGHT NOT are huge in your statement. It's not confirmed, so why complain?

[Gianakin_]

I never left my senses. I complain because of

1.the possibility that he won't return and
2.the fact that 2Face's rest of potential (and there's plenty) will not be reached.

[Batman jr.]

I'm complaining that I haven't seen the film yet.

[TLBorlando]

I never left my senses. I complain because of

1.the possibility that he won't return and
2.the fact that 2Face's rest of potential (and there's plenty) will not be reached.



You understand that it's not confirmed that Nolan isn't coming back; that's all I can say about that. I don't complain about possibilities, personally.

If you want more of Two-Face, keep reading the comic books. If the Two-Face death rumors are true, maybe they will do it in a way like they did for Ra's Al Ghul in which a body is not shown. Maybe this possibility will make you happy again. Or do you know something about that too?

[TLBorlando]

I'm complaining that I haven't seen the film yet.



LOL, and that should be the only thing to upset people right now

[Mr. Earle]

2Face is more than Dent going vigilante. Dent gets lost in 2Face, thus being able to provide at least 1-2 interesting stories.

And I want as much Joker as I can get. Main villain or not.
Seconded. But only if it makes sense and not as a cheap gimmick.
I'd say very.
Yes very. I was just comparing her importance in the Batworld.

[Gianakin_]

You understand that it's not confirmed that Nolan isn't coming back; that's all I can say about that. I don't complain about possibilities, personally.

I do. And if the word "complain" sounds a bit too heavy for you, let me rephrase: Worried.

If you want more of Two-Face, keep reading the comic books. If the Two-Face death rumors are true, maybe they will do it in a way like they did for Ra's Al Ghul in which a body is not shown. Maybe this possibility will make you happy again. Or do you know something about that too?

I do know something about that: His dead body and funeral are clearly shown. That's why I'm unhappy. If the gave him a comic-book death, I wouldn't even bring it up as an issue.

[Mr. Earle]

Damn you my friend Gianakin and your spoilers!!! I couldnt resiiiiiiiist!!!!!

How do you people know all this stuff?
No, nevermind, dont tell me, dont tell me!!!!

[Gianakin_]

Damn you my friend Gianakin and your spoilers!!! I couldnt resiiiiiiiist!!!!!

How do you people know all this stuff?
No, nevermind, dont tell me, dont tell me!!!!

Lol, if I tell you our source, it won't change what happens to him. It was Moriarty from AICN who confirmed earlier reports and reviews that stated 2Face's fate.

[TLBorlando]

I do. And if the word "complain" sounds a bit too heavy for you, let me rephrase: Worried.



I do know something about that: His dead body and funeral are clearly shown. That's why I'm unhappy. If the gave him a comic-book death, I wouldn't even bring it up as an issue.



I didn't click on the show button because I believe if I look for more trouble, I'm going to find it. LOL. But do you at least feel a little bit disheartened that you might know the end of this film?

[Gianakin_]

I didn't click on the show button because I believe if I look for more trouble, I'm going to find it. LOL. But do you at least feel a little bit disheartened that you might know the end of this film?

A wise choice. But what I wrote only addresses your question. Since you already know that 2Face dies, I don't know what difference my spoiler would make. Still, better safe than sorry.

I don't fell the least bit disheartened. Consider that I don't even know the film's specifics, just general plot points (and 1-2 specific at most). Even if I knew, though, it wouldn't be a problem for me. I knew every line of dialogue from SW-Episode III and almost died of excitement and enjoyment nontheless.

[Mr. Earle]

A wise choice. But what I wrote only addresses your question. Since you already know that 2Face dies, I don't know what difference my spoiler would make. Still, better safe than sorry.

I don't fell the least bit disheartened. Consider that I don't even know the film's specifics, just general plot points (and 1-2 specific at most). Even if I knew, though, it wouldn't be a problem for me. I knew every line of dialogue from SW-Episode III and almost died of excitement and enjoyment nontheless.Really? You knew so much about SW and you still enjoyed it? Damn i dont want to be so spoiled. I really enjoyed knowing nothing about BB and very few things about TF.

[TLBorlando]

A wise choice. But what I wrote only addresses your question. Since you already know that 2Face dies, I don't know what difference my spoiler would make. Still, better safe than sorry.

I don't fell the least bit disheartened. Consider that I don't even know the film's specifics, just general plot points (and 1-2 specific at most). Even if I knew, though, it wouldn't be a problem for me. I knew every line of dialogue from SW-Episode III and almost died of excitement and enjoyment nontheless.



I'm sorry brother, but Two-Face dying is still considered a rumor to me. But if it turns out to be true, a first, I will post an apology message to you in this board on July 18. LOL

But I still will not be worried if Two-Face is not in a Batman sequel. I did hear a while back that Batman goes on the run from the cops in the end. That would make sense if Harvey Two-Face dies in TDK. In considering that, you MIGHT be right.

[Mr. Earle]

Didnt you get the memo?

[Cory]

i didnt care too much about 2face in this film until i found the the bad news. 2face was a short little afterthought to me. it was more like "oh **** this joker is gonna rule ass, then twoface is gonna emerge near the end and set up on bad ass 3rd movie". but now that the badnews about 2face is out, its reallly pissing me off haha

[turtlefocker]

It's really just not bad news

[namtaB]

i didnt care too much about 2face in this film until i found the the bad news. 2face was a short little afterthought to me. it was more like "oh **** this joker is gonna rule ass, then twoface is gonna emerge near the end and set up on bad ass 3rd movie". but now that the badnews about 2face is out, its reallly pissing me off haha

It's really just not bad news

Does it depress you? How pissed off you really are

[famkeicepick]

for anybody who doesn't believe yet about you know what...

just go to these links...Mariority HAS seen the movie, and I am inclined to believe what he is saying -

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=15157370&postcount=2449

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=15161775&postcount=2658

[Spade]

It's not a rumor anymore. We have someone with no reason to lie telling us exactly what happens to him. Wanna complain about it? That's your right. But let's not continue denying the facts.

[BatmanFreak23]

Wait...how does he die?

[Boom]

Wait...how does he die?
Falls off a building.

[TheDarkJoker]

Makes sense. This will make the movie even more interesting.

[Closerframe]

Now when you say fall off a building, I wonder does he just plunge into complete darkness or is a body recovered?

[turtlefocker]

Now when you say fall off a building, I wonder does he just plunge into complete darkness or is a body recovered?

Bats and Gordon have a conversation standing beside the body... then their is the funeral...

[Agentsands77]

Now when you say fall off a building, I wonder does he just plunge into complete darkness or is a body recovered?
A body is recovered. And then there's a funeral.

[DSET]

i didnt care too much about 2face in this film until i found the the bad news. 2face was a short little afterthought to me. it was more like "oh **** this joker is gonna rule ass, then twoface is gonna emerge near the end and set up on bad ass 3rd movie". but now that the badnews about 2face is out, its reallly pissing me off haha

I think once us fans see the way its handled we'll be happy to see it and like the ending
but just dissapointed that hes not in the third movie

[inflames]

I dunno...Two-Face dying adds I certain weight to the film, actually I like how a fair amount of characters do in this film, it usually doesn't happen in many 'comic' movies.

[BruceWayne]

A body is recovered. And then there's a funeral.

But do we know it's actually his body??

[turtlefocker]

But do we know it's actually his body??

YES!!!!!!!! yes we do! holy ****ing ****. HE IS DEAD, just ****ing DEAD

[DSET]

YES!!!!!!!! yes we do! holy ****ing ****. HE IS DEAD, just ****ing DEAD

LooooOOOOL:pal:
:lmao:

[The Guard]

See, this just strikes me as kind of a stupid story move done mostly for shock value. You don't need that particular ending for Batman to be an outcast, for people to think he's a killer, etc. Or for Batman to feel alone.

[DSET]

See, this just strikes me as kind of a stupid story move done mostly for shock value. You don't need that particular ending for Batman to be an outcast, for people to think he's a killer, etc. Or for Batman to feel alone.
I agree and disagree
This is probably a similar outcome that would happen in p3
its just being prolonged.
Though I would have rather seen it in p3 Im sure it will be fine here but yes a little unnecessary in the sense that I would rather batman have less to do with Harveys death. But yeah having him in jail is almost as good because harvey is still gone and it works the same way his existance as two face also haunts him.

[Spider Edge]

so then....how much of Two-Face do we see in the film?

[Boom]

so then....how much of Two-Face do we see in the film?
30 minutes.

[Rory Gets Paid]

So since my Harvey "death" speculation thread got deleted for having an opinion outside the consensus, I'll comment here. Does anyone have a link to a review or credible thread or anywhere proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Harvey "funeral" scene doesn't happen before the bar room scene? I just can't will myself to believe what something says without seeing it for myself...you all understand don't you?

(Countdown till someone says I'm in denial...5...4...3...come on, honestly:whatever:)

[inflames]

So since my Harvey "death" speculation thread got deleted for having an opinion outside the consensus, I'll comment here. Does anyone have a link to a review or credible thread or anywhere proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Harvey "funeral" scene doesn't happen before the bar room scene? I just can't will myself to believe what something says without seeing it for myself...you all understand don't you?

(Countdown till someone says I'm in denial...5...4...3...come on, honestly:whatever:)your just being an ass honestly you just refuse to accept the truth.

[Rory Gets Paid]

your just being an ass honestly you just refuse to accept the truth.



Honestly, though...did I call it, or did i call it? lol Can't I just get a straight answer, sans-flame? lol Anybody?

Edit: inflames, disregard above post if you were being sarcastic lol

Edit: or ironic, seeing as though your name is what it is lol

[Spider Edge]

hmmm.....this is certainly news to me......I was fully expecting Harvey Dent / Two-Face to be the prime focus / villain of the 3rd film........

I'm not sure I like this news.......seems kind of a waste of character?

[Rory Gets Paid]

hmmm.....this is certainly news to me......I was fully expecting Harvey Dent / Two-Face to be the prime focus / villain of the 3rd film........

I'm not sure I like this news.......seems kind of a waste of character?

My thoughts as well...which is why I wanted to try to encourage a bit of intelligent debate regarding said "death" and subsequent funeral.

[Boom]

So since my Harvey "death" speculation thread got deleted for having an opinion outside the consensus, I'll comment here. Does anyone have a link to a review or credible thread or anywhere proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Harvey "funeral" scene doesn't happen before the bar room scene? I just can't will myself to believe what something says without seeing it for myself...you all understand don't you?

(Countdown till someone says I'm in denial...5...4...3...come on, honestly:whatever:)
Devin (Chud.Com): To the Two-Face question: He dies at the end.
http://chud.com/forum/showthread.php?t=109450&page=3

Moriarty, (AICN.Com): Let me state this clearly: Two-Face dies. It happens on-camera. We see his body. We see his funeral. And his death changes everything for Gotham and Batman, and the end of the film... in fact, the TITLE of the film... hinges on Harvey's death and the subsequent cover-up of the truth about it.
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=15157370#post15157370

Moriarty, (AICN.Com): But that's where you're wrong. He's not set up to be the key focus of a third film. Harvey's rise and fall is almost ENTIRELY the focus of this movie. Harvey's heroism is what keeps Bruce focused as Batman. Harvey's integrity is what makes the Joker so crazy and determined to destroy him. And Harvey's eventual destruction is what turns Gotham against Batman, possibly forever.

This is the film about Harvey Dent and Two-Face. There's no set-up for the next movie involved. You get it all here.
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=15161775#post15161775

[Rory Gets Paid]

apologies...double post.

[inflames]

My thoughts as well...which is why I wanted to try to encourage a bit of intelligent debate regarding said "death" and subsequent funeral.it's not intelligent debating, your going to be one that even after seeing the movie will say 'i know he has still gotta be alive!!1!!'

[Rory Gets Paid]

oops! Triple...sorry lol

[Rory Gets Paid]

it's not intelligent debating, your going to be one that even after seeing the movie will say 'i know he has still gotta be alive!!1!!'

Wow, you just have me all figured out, now dontcha? lol :oldrazz:

[turtlefocker]

anyone still in denial about this is ****ing retarded. Sorry but this is absurd. It's like claiming that the year is actually 1947 and were part of a government test to see how people will hand the internet. Our whole life is fake.

[Spider Edge]

so.....is two-face an actual villain in this movie?

I'm just surprised by this.......Dent/Two-face is such a major Batman villain....I'd think that he'd deserve his own movie.

Just as Joker is such a major villain that he deserves his own movie.

Now, though, it seems the Two-face is getting the "venom treatment"....thrown in their for fan service but then killed off fairly quickly without any much development......

this is just.......wow........

[inflames]

so.....is two-face an actual villain in this movie?

I'm just surprised by this.......Dent/Two-face is such a major Batman villain....I'd think that he'd deserve his own movie.

Just as Joker is such a major villain that he deserves his own movie.

Now, though, it seems the Two-face is getting the "venom treatment"....thrown in their for fan service but then killed off fairly quickly without any much development......

this is just.......wow........He isn't a villain in nolans world

[turtlefocker]

He is not getting the venom treatment

[Ecstasy]

But the general public would comprehend it as the 'venom treatment.'


Don't say the public wouldn't think that.

[Rory Gets Paid]

anyone still in denial about this is ****ing retarded. Sorry but this is absurd. It's like claiming that the year is actually 1947 and were part of a government test to see how people will hand the internet. Our whole life is fake.

Wow.

[turtlefocker]

The public will not think that. He has over three times the amount of screen time has face that Eddie had as venom.

[turtlefocker]

Wow.

Saying Two-Face doesn't DIE in this movie is a ****ing absurd statement at this point

[Anita18]

so.....is two-face an actual villain in this movie?

I'm just surprised by this.......Dent/Two-face is such a major Batman villain....I'd think that he'd deserve his own movie.

Just as Joker is such a major villain that he deserves his own movie.

Now, though, it seems the Two-face is getting the "venom treatment"....thrown in their for fan service but then killed off fairly quickly without any much development......

this is just.......wow........
I will keep on repeating this cause I think it's a fun thing to say:

The only people who have a problem with it are people who have not seen the film yet. :oldrazz:

[Rory Gets Paid]

Devin (Chud.Com): To the Two-Face question: He dies at the end.
http://chud.com/forum/showthread.php?t=109450&page=3

Moriarty, (AICN.Com): Let me state this clearly: Two-Face dies. It happens on-camera. We see his body. We see his funeral. And his death changes everything for Gotham and Batman, and the end of the film... in fact, the TITLE of the film... hinges on Harvey's death and the subsequent cover-up of the truth about it.
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=15157370#post15157370

Moriarty, (AICN.Com): But that's where you're wrong. He's not set up to be the key focus of a third film. Harvey's rise and fall is almost ENTIRELY the focus of this movie. Harvey's heroism is what keeps Bruce focused as Batman. Harvey's integrity is what makes the Joker so crazy and determined to destroy him. And Harvey's eventual destruction is what turns Gotham against Batman, possibly forever.

This is the film about Harvey Dent and Two-Face. There's no set-up for the next movie involved. You get it all here.
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=15161775#post15161775


Yeah...read the links, and I'm still not convinced that anyone can confirm anything. I'll apologize to every member of this site if Harvey AND Two-Face are both (beyond a shadow of a bat, er... I mean doubt) dead by the end of this film. But let it be known that I expect the same in the event the opposite occurs. Cheers!

[Spider Edge]

well....Two-face IS a Batman villain......and a very personal villain at that....given Dent's and Wayne's prior relationship/allegiance......which I was expecting this movie to be setting up.....

so.....even with Dent/Two-face "dying" in this movie.....is it possible that maybe he just faked his death or didn't really die.....and that he could return in the 3rd movie as a more crazy two-face?

[Boom]

But the general public would comprehend it as the 'venom treatment.'


Don't say the public wouldn't think that.
That depends. Is the character of Harvey Dent and Two-Face handled like ****? Is Dent a character that was just tacked onto the film last minute and provides nothing important to the story?

If yes, then sure, people would compare him to Venom. However, all signs indicate the opposite.