Batman should die in the next film!

[dru-zod2501]

I say that in all seriousness. I think if Bruce dies in the 3rd movie it would be the perfect cap to arguably the best comic book movie series to date.

Fans have been saying since Begins, The hyper-realism of Nolanverse leaves little room to explore the other, more far-out elements of the Bat mythos, that and Nolan himself has said several times there are characters and elements that have no place in his world and he never wants to use them.

I say fine, let someone else come in and do their own Batman their own way. But after Nolan leaves don't do us the disservice of making a "pseudo-sequel" a la Superman Returns & Batman Forever where no one but the director knows for sure whether it follows anything that came before. It's a ******** gimmick that causes more problems than it solves.

since this is kind of an elseworlds Batman story, there's no reason to keep it open ended like other stories. Unlike the previous series, Nolan's movies form a much more cohesive narrative, and that narrative needs a true, definitive ending in order to feel complete. How would any of you feel if they changed the ending of "Return of The King" in the hopes of milking a 4th LoTR movie? The height of absurdity, right?



It's almost a sure bet that Joker won't be back without Heath Ledger (as it should be), but the ambiguity of Two-Face's fate means he can be brought back without much difficulty. This serves several purposes:

1: Gordon & Batman's worst fears are realized, the myth of Harvey Dent is shattered as Gotham is forced to face the ugly truth and uglier face of its once revered savior

2: It means Batman can be vindicated, at least in the eyes of the public, they might finally realize that Bruce really was the hero they deserved AND needed all along.

3: C'mon... Two-Face is too good a villain not to give him a chance to wreak major havoc:word:


Two-Face should go for broke, he should be hell-bent on burning Gotham to the ground (or at least half of it). During the course of the action something will happen, and Batman has no choice but to rush headlong into a situation he knows he probably won't survive, but he never wavers even for a moment, as long as he can draw a breath Gotham will survive. Two-Face is finally defeated and dies conclusively as Bruce dies as well.

He lived as a warrior, let him die a warrior's death. Alfred remains to tell the story and set the records straight. In the end Bruce Wayne did just what he said he'd do back in "Begins," he returned long enough to show his people their city didn't belong to the criminals and the corrupt.

You could tell me I'm crazy, but I know I'm not. How ballsy would that be, if Nolan had the guts to kill off the hero in the end? And not just any hero, THE GODDAMN BATMAN!

[[A]]

:eek:

[JaD]

You know, I'm not gonna lie. I swear I was thinking about something like this a while ago. I kept thinking about how amazing it would be if Nolan did something like this, like in the 3rd movie what if Batman sacrifices himself to save a ton of people in the end, and it turns into a "The Legend Of The Dark Knight" type of ending (or movie). I don't think this idea is too crazy at all. It'd be a ballsy yet groundbreaking move in the cbm genre, it's not like he hasn't already broke some ground with his first 2 Batman movies :brucebat:

[dru-zod2501]

then for ****s n giggles, the fat guys in hockey pads take to the streets once again in memory of their fallen hero:oldrazz::grin:

[bane]

I think Alfred will die in the 3rd movie, so that Bruce can be completely lost in his monster of his.

[kedrell]

I'd be on board with that. They're never going to stop making Batman films, no matter who's directing. And Nolan/Bale were never gonna stick around forever. The future awaits.

[Gexmeister]

At first, it sounds crazy, but then it kinda makes sense. It'd fit thematically.

Besides, as kedrell said, there are always gonna be more Batman-movies, so it's not like they'd be killing him off permanently, just for the Nolan series. That'd also be a good way to make sure that this particular series does not continue. We all know what would happen otherwise, the movies after the third would inevitably start veering more into the fantastical.

[Bathead]

No. It's not "ballsy" or groundbreaking, it's a stupid idea all the way around.

[dru-zod2501]

No. It's not "ballsy" or groundbreaking, it's a stupid idea all the way around.
the all around stupid idea would be Batman 4 and on, rehashing the same used mobster plots with a nutjob baddie thrown in the mix.

This is something that hasn't been covered in movies in any real detail, the end of the hero's career. If anyone can do it, I'm sure Nolan could do it and do it well

[El Payaso]

In the last scene Scarecrow is all happy that Batman died and he goes out to take over Gotham... untill he finds a girl with a tazer.

[BatFan88]

I don't think batman most die.than they are going to far,much fans will really be mad i think.

[El Payaso]

I don't think batman most die.than they are going to far,much fans will really be mad i think.

That alone is more than enough reason to do it. :joker:

[AnorexicBatman]

I will personally place Nolan and Bale in two separate warehouses in Chicago packed with explosives and rigged to blow and give the Warner exec the chance to choose which one he wants to save ...

If they dare to kill Bruce, Alfred, Fox or Gordon....

[Two-Face]

I say that in all seriousness. I think if Bruce dies in the 3rd movie it would be the perfect cap to arguably the best comic book movie series to date.

Fans have been saying since Begins, The hyper-realism of Nolanverse leaves little room to explore the other, more far-out elements of the Bat mythos, that and Nolan himself has said several times there are characters and elements that have no place in his world and he never wants to use them.

I say fine, let someone else come in and do their own Batman their own way. But after Nolan leaves don't do us the disservice of making a "pseudo-sequel" a la Superman Returns & Batman Forever where no one but the director knows for sure whether it follows anything that came before. It's a ******** gimmick that causes more problems than it solves.

since this is kind of an elseworlds Batman story, there's no reason to keep it open ended like other stories. Unlike the previous series, Nolan's movies form a much more cohesive narrative, and that narrative needs a true, definitive ending in order to feel complete. How would any of you feel if they changed the ending of "Return of The King" in the hopes of milking a 4th LoTR movie? The height of absurdity, right?



It's almost a sure bet that Joker won't be back without Heath Ledger (as it should be), but the ambiguity of Two-Face's fate means he can be brought back without much difficulty. This serves several purposes:

1: Gordon & Batman's worst fears are realized, the myth of Harvey Dent is shattered as Gotham is forced to face the ugly truth and uglier face of its once revered savior

2: It means Batman can be vindicated, at least in the eyes of the public, they might finally realize that Bruce really was the hero they deserved AND needed all along.

3: C'mon... Two-Face is too good a villain not to give him a chance to wreak major havoc:word:


Two-Face should go for broke, he should be hell-bent on burning Gotham to the ground (or at least half of it). During the course of the action something will happen, and Batman has no choice but to rush headlong into a situation he knows he probably won't survive, but he never wavers even for a moment, as long as he can draw a breath Gotham will survive. Two-Face is finally defeated and dies conclusively as Bruce dies as well.

He lived as a warrior, let him die a warrior's death. Alfred remains to tell the story and set the records straight. In the end Bruce Wayne did just what he said he'd do back in "Begins," he returned long enough to show his people their city didn't belong to the criminals and the corrupt.

You could tell me I'm crazy, but I know I'm not. How ballsy would that be, if Nolan had the guts to kill off the hero in the end? And not just any hero, THE GODDAMN BATMAN!


Think about what you done......:cmad::hehe:

[kedrell]

I don't think it's axiomatic that Batman must die at the end of the 3rd film(I do think it would work, though), but I damn sure don't want whoever's taking over this franchise after Nolan & Co. to go around imitating what Nolan did. Have your own damn vision, future Batman director guy!

[Milu]

Why kill off Batman?

Trying to be 'different and edgy' all the time is not always a good thing, you know.

[BatmanForNever]

I think he should fake his death, and return with a pose of Batmen!!!!

[kedrell]

It wouldn't merely be to be "edgy and different". If that was the only reason then I'd consider that to be a poor excuse to do that. It would be to bookend Nolan/Bale's run and open the door wide open for a new take on the franchise. Hopefully one that would enable Batman to fit in more with stuff like the other DC heroes or employ more of his more fantastical villains.

[shingi70]

thruthfully why cant they veer off into the werid bat mythos stuff? I know nolans batman is realstic but wasnt the point off the dark knight and oringal bob kane series was esclation. The more batman pushed the response was the werider villans and bad guys .

plus i want to see christan bale in the JL movie it would make for some great interaction between bats and these super super heroes.

also isnt it possible to make pausible origins for people like clayface and killer kroc.

[bunk]

Bruce has only gotten to be Batman for a couple of years in the Nolanverse so far. Why kill him off so early on? They've barely scratched the surface with him.

[kedrell]

^Because Nolan and Bale are likely to do only one more movie, at most I'd say.

[Spider-Vader]

I say no. Who wants to see Batman die? Hell DC didn't even really kill him in the comics. There's no way he'll die.

[bunk]

^Because Nolan and Bale are likely to do only one more movie, at most I'd say.


So... they should kill off Batman rather than have another actor play him? Seems a bit drastic to me.

[Punk&ComicBooks]

If some director wanted to make a "pseudo sequel" to the nolan franchise its not the director you have to go after with torches and pitchforks...its WB for giving it the green light...btw just because we havent really had a good "pseudo sequel" yet doesnt mean its not possible for one to actually be liked by us you can always grow to the idea if you stay open minded I mean look what happend when we all saw that the jokers white face is just makeup and not his real skin...a lot of people were upset but what they lacked for in appearance they made up very much and then some staying true to character (which is what really matters). The point is ya never know (not that i liked BF or B&R) but to kill off batman just to sever any chance of trying to continue from that i think is...yea just not good lol

[Drz]

I say no. Who wants to see Batman die? Hell DC didn't even really kill him in the comics. There's no way he'll die.

Didn't Batman die in the Silver Age world? Where he married Catwoman and they gave birth to Huntress. :p

Point: Elseworld stories are always elseworld. ^^ Its like saying villains can't die in movies because they don't die in comics. =P

[paulbalarsky]

:brucebat:i agree with batmanfornever

[dru-zod2501]

I say no. Who wants to see Batman die? Hell DC didn't even really kill him in the comics. There's no way he'll die.
If we're going to get technical, yes they've killed Batman in the comics before, way back in the 70s, the Golden Age Batman died for good. And in several elseworlds that have been published since then; it's not like such a move would be unprecedented.

This is not a gimmick for the sake of gimmicks; this is meant as a closure to Nolan's story, which if you watch the first two movies, they flow like one long saga. It needs to have a real ending.

thruthfully why cant they veer off into the werid bat mythos stuff? I know nolans batman is realstic but wasnt the point off the dark knight and oringal bob kane series was esclation. The more batman pushed the response was the werider villans and bad guys .



plus i want to see christan bale in the JL movie it would make for some great interaction between bats and these super super heroes.



also isnt it possible to make pausible origins for people like clayface and killer kroc.
Because Nolan says his Batman doesn't get into that kind of stuff. I'm not going to second guess him on his own creation.

Baleman in the JL? HA!! keep dreaming!

[Chris Wallace]

I say that in all seriousness. I think if Bruce dies in the 3rd movie it would be the perfect cap to arguably the best comic book movie series to date.

Fans have been saying since Begins, The hyper-realism of Nolanverse leaves little room to explore the other, more far-out elements of the Bat mythos, that and Nolan himself has said several times there are characters and elements that have no place in his world and he never wants to use them.

I say fine, let someone else come in and do their own Batman their own way. But after Nolan leaves don't do us the disservice of making a "pseudo-sequel" a la Superman Returns & Batman Forever where no one but the director knows for sure whether it follows anything that came before. It's a ******** gimmick that causes more problems than it solves.

since this is kind of an elseworlds Batman story, there's no reason to keep it open ended like other stories. Unlike the previous series, Nolan's movies form a much more cohesive narrative, and that narrative needs a true, definitive ending in order to feel complete. How would any of you feel if they changed the ending of "Return of The King" in the hopes of milking a 4th LoTR movie? The height of absurdity, right?



It's almost a sure bet that Joker won't be back without Heath Ledger (as it should be), but the ambiguity of Two-Face's fate means he can be brought back without much difficulty. This serves several purposes:

1: Gordon & Batman's worst fears are realized, the myth of Harvey Dent is shattered as Gotham is forced to face the ugly truth and uglier face of its once revered savior

2: It means Batman can be vindicated, at least in the eyes of the public, they might finally realize that Bruce really was the hero they deserved AND needed all along.

3: C'mon... Two-Face is too good a villain not to give him a chance to wreak major havoc:word:


Two-Face should go for broke, he should be hell-bent on burning Gotham to the ground (or at least half of it). During the course of the action something will happen, and Batman has no choice but to rush headlong into a situation he knows he probably won't survive, but he never wavers even for a moment, as long as he can draw a breath Gotham will survive. Two-Face is finally defeated and dies conclusively as Bruce dies as well.

He lived as a warrior, let him die a warrior's death. Alfred remains to tell the story and set the records straight. In the end Bruce Wayne did just what he said he'd do back in "Begins," he returned long enough to show his people their city didn't belong to the criminals and the corrupt.

You could tell me I'm crazy, but I know I'm not. How ballsy would that be, if Nolan had the guts to kill off the hero in the end? And not just any hero, THE GODDAMN BATMAN!No.

[dru-zod2501]

So... they should kill off Batman rather than have another actor play him? Seems a bit drastic to me.
sigh... they wouldn't be killing "Batman" off, they'd be killing this particular Batman off. The next actor will play a new Batman. simple.

How many more gang wars can Batman get into until everyone is sick of them? the same plot again and again, and again, and again, in slightly differently colored packaging, it's the Terminator syndrome. And I for one couldn't bear to see that happen to a series of this caliber.

[dru-zod2501]

If some director wanted to make a "pseudo sequel" to the nolan franchise its not the director you have to go after with torches and pitchforks...its WB for giving it the green light...btw just because we havent really had a good "pseudo sequel" yet doesnt mean its not possible for one to actually be liked by us you can always grow to the idea if you stay open minded I mean look what happend when we all saw that the jokers white face is just makeup and not his real skin...a lot of people were upset but what they lacked for in appearance they made up very much and then some staying true to character (which is what really matters). The point is ya never know (not that i liked BF or B&R) but to kill off batman just to sever any chance of trying to continue from that i think is...yea just not good lol
I'll be happy to eat my words if I'm proven wrong, but I'm confident I won't be.

If after the third movie Batman is still alive, and the fourth movie has only the loosest connection to the Nolan movies, apart from maybe one or two actors and a few references, it will be a colossal mistake on WB's part.

[bunk]

sigh... they wouldn't be killing "Batman" off, they'd be killing this particular Batman off. The next actor will play a new Batman. simple.

How many more gang wars can Batman get into until everyone is sick of them? the same plot again and again, and again, and again, in slightly differently colored packaging

Yes, they'd be killing off Nolan's version of Batman in lieu of a new actor playing him. Drastic. I never implied it would be the end of Batman on film.

You seem to have a fear of the same stories being rehashed, but also seem to want the franchise restarted every 3 movies. How do you reconcile these two wishes?

[kedrell]

You don't need to re-start the franchise over again. BB did the origin story well enough that another should really not be necessary, possibly ever again. We're not talking about reboots(that's what you need to do when you royally F it up) or a re-start(basically another name for a reboot), but rather a reimagining. A different take to be started somewhere with Batman already ensconced as Gotham's dark knight/protector.

[DarkReflections]

first of all i dont want batman to die in film unless the film is in the future and its precedessor was following what to them would be a past storyline like final crisis, batman rip, and battle of the cowl. i mean look what happend to the 3rd x-men when ratner used the gifted storyline involving a cure as an influence. it messed the film up hence why a modern storyline happening at the same time simply does not work. also whats the point with studios like wb to keep rebooting movie franchises anyway? i mean the whole point of the batman reboot was to make a good movie. seriously they went from batman and robin which is the biggest bomb in motion picture history to the dark knight which is now one of the greatist films ever and one of the highest grossing films ever. they shouldnt reboot batman just because heath died and apparently two-face died, and they definatley shouldnt do any "psuedo sequels", or any type of crap like that just so they can make more money of of future generations of kids. i couldnt care less if they keep making animated movies or a new animated series every 5 years or so. i just dont want wb to keep screwing around with the movies. nolan and bale should come back for one more and have the 3rd one end on a triumphant and ambiguous note. thats what should happen.

[bunk]

You don't need to re-start the franchise over again. BB did the origin story well enough that another should really not be necessary, possibly ever again. We're not talking about reboots(that's what you need to do when you royally F it up) or a re-start(basically another name for a reboot), but rather a reimagining. A different take to be started somewhere with Batman already ensconced as Gotham's dark knight/protector.


If one were unsatisfied with the current franchise, I could see why a re-imagining would be desirable. There are many "takes" on the character that could be explored. I fail to see how this approach is necessary to avoid "rehashing" stories. I would think the best way to avoid that would be to continue with a series which as already told certain stories, and thus is forced to imagine new ones.

[dru-zod2501]

Yes, they'd be killing off Nolan's version of Batman in lieu of a new actor playing him. Drastic. I never implied it would be the end of Batman on film.

You seem to have a fear of the same stories being rehashed, but also seem to want the franchise restarted every 3 movies. How do you reconcile these two wishes?
I never said I wanted the franchise restarted so quickly. If BB and TDK had been set up differently

1: to allow for the more garish, bizarre, and fantastic elements in the Nolanverse
and
2: so the story doesn't feel so serialized, like one long story

I wouldn't be saying any of this. The last franchise for example, if the quality hadn't dropped off so steeply they could've kept it going forever if they wanted. The movies were for the most part stand alone, and readily accepted the fantasy elements. They had all the room in the world to grow and expand, but they took it too far, like Silver Age too far

[bunk]

So you basically just like Nolan's particular brand of Batman enough to see it continue.

That's a perfectly valid viewpoint, it just isn't a a good argument for killing the character off.

[Mr. Todd]

Batman should die in the next film!

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/1416/bearhowaboutnowj9.jpg

I don't mind the idea of Alfred dying though.

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

I'd be open to it...

[AnorexicBatman]

Do you people have a problem with another director taking Nolan's Batman and moving forward with it? If so, why?

[kedrell]

^For a few reasons:

Bale is Nolan's Batman and he's likely not going to continue past the 3rd film anymore than Nolan is.

Also, Nolan's take on Batman(great as it is) is still limited. It cuts out entire swaths of Batman's mythos that would simply never work with that kind of take(too fantastical). I'd like the next Batman director to try to shoot right down the middle between Nolan's version and Burton's.

[Lighthouse]

I totally agree with this. I feel like this is where its all been heading. Batman 3 shouldn't end with a status quo Batman universe, where little has changed. I think this is a fully done story with and end. It would make a certain amount of sense if Batman sacrificed himself and actually saves Gotham from the crime. That doesn't mean there won't be more movies with Batman in them, but if its something like Justice League or a Worlds Finest movie, it'll have someone else playing Batman, with its own little universe in it. It would have to be that way anyway since Bale will unlikely be back after Batman 3.

[Eric Brooks]

kedrell........your av.....I can't stop looking



and I'm up for Nolan's Bats to recieve the death treatement

[Prison Mike]

I kind of like this idea. In all honesty, if Nolan truly wants his movies to be realistic then what's more realistic than the death of a vigilante? In the real world, I don't think an actual vigilante would survive as long as Batman has already. He's just one man. Sooner or later he is bound to make a mistake which will cause his downfall.

[bunk]

I kind of like this idea. In all honesty, if Nolan truly wants his movies to be realistic then what's more realistic than the death of a vigilante? In the real world, I don't think an actual vigilante would survive as long as Batman has already. He's just one man. Sooner or later he is bound to make a mistake which will cause his downfall.


He becomes more experienced as he goes along. He would probably be more likely to make one of those mistakes early on. If he just randomly dies from a mistake in the middle of his career, it sort of implies he'd been relying on luck to a larger degree the entire time. Now if he sacrificed himself, that would be different.

[dru-zod2501]

^For a few reasons:

Bale is Nolan's Batman and he's likely not going to continue past the 3rd film anymore than Nolan is.

Also, Nolan's take on Batman(great as it is) is still limited. It cuts out entire swaths of Batman's mythos that would simply never work with that kind of take(too fantastical). I'd like the next Batman director to try to shoot right down the middle between Nolan's version and Burton's.
your post is spot on, and your avi is hypnotic... perfect!!

[weezerspider]

They can end the Nolan series without killing Batman and still make it obvious that the next set of movies are not in the same universe as BB,TDK and the next film. Killing off Batman is a stupid idea.

[TheBatman072]

This is dumb.

[kedrell]

They can end the Nolan series without killing Batman and still make it obvious that the next set of movies are not in the same universe as BB,TDK and the next film. Killing off Batman is a stupid idea.

If they can, then sure. I've no problem with it. I just want Nolan's run book-ended to stand alone on it's own.

But having Batman die would certainly accomplish that.

[Caped Crusader]

Won't happen. Should not happen.

[Kurt Wagner]

it wouldnt make sense to have Batman die when WB is planning 8 batman films total in this franchise. If anyone should die, it should be Dick Grayson's parents and Dick Grayson can live at the newly built Wayne Mansion while Batman does his crime fighting... Robin doesn't need to enter the films, but having grayson there would add more drama in Bruce's life.

[Kurt Wagner]

Or if he dies, I think it should be a faked death so that Bruce can live in hiding while crime rates escalate.... then when Bruce realizes his purpose again, he comes out as the batman.

[Dark Knight]

I think it should be made to look like Batman is dead similiar to what was done in Millers TDKR's graphic novel, but he really doesn't die.

[kedrell]

Nolan & Bale WILL NOT be sticking around for another 6 movies. One more at best. You shouldn't view the Batman franchise like Star Wars or LOTR. It's more like James Bond. They'll be making them forever.

[Naite22]

I'm all for the dark batman movies, but I really dont think that they should kill off Bruce/batman in the third flick. he suffered a lot of pain in TDK (and will most likely suffer even more in the concluding chapter)... I think the third movie should end with Batman alive and kicking, and a Gotham that finaly sees, at least some light. Not that i dont see something clever in the idea of batman dying in the third, I just think it's a bit TOO SAD:csad:'

TDK is one of the top 3 best movies I've ever seen! Nothing can compare in its grand way of telling the story (NO, I dont even think Lord of the rings can match it!). It was so intense, so compelling, so fantasticly directed! The cast was way above great, the story was so unbelievably badass and flawless; I can't ****ing believe the movie wasn't nominated for best picture, when a flick like Return of the King was, and more than that even won it!...

I can't wait for the third batman picture! but if the entire cast of Begins and Knight isn't back, than leave it be! TDK didn't end with a cliff-hanger. It ended openly, and doesn't really need a sequel (but my God, I'd kill for one!). The ending was as majestic, powerful and tear dropping as can be!

[Alex Logan]

WORST. IDEA. EVER!

Lock this thread!

[Fresh Prince]

I would not mind seeing he would die in Nolan world only. Besides with Nolan not using the rest of Batman cool villiand who cause a threat to Batman and reason why he cannot retire early it be no point to keep him alive. All the mobsters killed and the few threat villians are either locked up or dead. So only thing to worry about is thugs but cops can take them down. So Batman bascially would not be needed in Gotham anymore.

[BatmanForNever]

Or if he dies, I think it should be a faked death so that Bruce can live in hiding while crime rates escalate.... then when Bruce realizes his purpose again, he comes out as the batman.

Which like I said sets up the Dark Knight Returns so well, and so much time could pass that the Joker returns so we can use another actor. It would be fabulous.

[Fresh Prince]

Which like I said sets up the Dark Knight Returns so well, and so much time could pass that the Joker returns so we can use another actor. It would be fabulous.

Yeah but then that means TDKR will be in Nolan world and it should not be. It should be totally different so we can have the real Batman world.

[darknight7]

In the last scene Scarecrow is all happy that Batman died and he goes out to take over Gotham... untill he finds a girl with a tazer.

LMAO

--dk7

[darknight7]

I think it should be made to look like Batman is dead similiar to what was done in Millers TDKR's graphic novel, but he really doesn't die.

The only problem is, they did that with Gordon in TDK and it would just seem like a rehash idea now

--dk7

[darknight7]

Not to mention, they did the whole "BATMAN IS CAPTURED" idea with Dent...

They really killed 2 birds with 1 stone in TDK lol...

So Batman's death or fake death is uneccessary

--dk7

[Wesley Dodds]

The Jokers made a few very Ledger-esque appearances since TDK... His segment of the Joker's Asylum limited series was very, VERRRRRRYYYYY TDK.
Also, I don't care what Azzerello and Bermejo say... Their Joker from the "JOKER" is clearly inspired by TDK... It's just too big of a coincidence otherwise.

[Fresh Prince]

Okay so maybe Batman dying not a good idea.

[Fresh Prince]

The Jokers made a few very Ledger-esque appearances since TDK... His segment of the Joker's Asylum limited series was very, VERRRRRRYYYYY TDK.
Also, I don't care what Azzerello and Bermejo say... Their Joker from the "JOKER" is clearly inspired by TDK... It's just too big of a coincidence otherwise.

Pretty much it is.

[Milk.Bad.Choice]

I've been thinking this for a while, it would actually be perfect if DC really wanted Bruce to put down the mantle, ie the comics.

[AnorexicBatman]

I'd rather have Bruce go back in time and become a cave man...
Oh wait... HAHAHAHAHAHA! ... DC already did that... I'm serious...

[Fresh Prince]

I've been thinking this for a while, it would actually be perfect if DC really wanted Bruce to put down the mantle, ie the comics.

That would fail epicly for a movie.

[Fresh Prince]

I've been thinking this for a while, it would actually be perfect if DC really wanted Bruce to put down the mantle, ie the comics.

That would fail epicly for a movie.:hehe:

[raphaeltmnt]

This idea could work out to perfection but killing Batman..eh I don't know about that. It would make for an epic finish, but that just isn't like the dark knight to be killed that quick. Especially since Bruce is behind the cowl.

[Fresh Prince]

True.

[bullets]

I say that in all seriousness. I think if Bruce dies in the 3rd movie it would be the perfect cap to arguably the best comic book movie series to date.





http://i697.photobucket.com/albums/vv335/fat0ninja/fail.jpg

[Fresh Prince]

http://i697.photobucket.com/albums/vv335/fat0ninja/fail.jpg

:lmao:

[VenomVsSpidey]

WORST. IDEA. EVER!

Lock this thread!


:up:

[Fresh Prince]

This thread not locked yet?

[VenomVsSpidey]

This thread not locked yet?


guess not...

[Fresh Prince]

Always liked the idea of Batman figthing Dracula in a live action movie.

[Two-Face]

It will die if we don't reply to this thread

[The Law Demon]

I don't think Batman should die so early in his career, but I would like a time gap between Batman 3 and any potential sequels. This would effectively separate Nolan's work from that of whoever inherits the Batman franchise, thereby serving the same intended purpose that Batman's death would.

[Léo Ho Tep]

Qft

[Judson Caspian]

I think Alfred will die in the 3rd movie, so that Bruce can be completely lost in his monster of his.
Damn good television.

[Léo Ho Tep]

Damn good television.

I think Rachel's death was necessary, as she was the one and only bound to his bruce wayne life. But Alfred is part of hs path to becoming the Dark Knight, and he still needs him as a guide.

still it would be interesting to see how he cops with the lost, but I supect it would be close to ho he was when he thought gordon was dead.

[VenomsMom]

This idea is interesting. I kind of like it. This series should end with Batman 3 anyways so why not. Batman sacrificing himself for Gotham .........a tragic end that unites them all.

[VenomVsSpidey]

This idea is interesting. I kind of like it. This series should end with Batman 3 anyways so why not. Batman sacrificing himself for Gotham .........a tragic end that unites them all.


http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/2445/epicfaill.jpg

[VenomsMom]

http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/2445/epicfaill.jpg
LOL. I like that. They should build you a stage. You have a gift for comedy.

[VenomVsSpidey]

LOL. I like that. They should build you a stage. You have a gift for comedy.


i dont know if your serious or not, but thanks??:huh::huh:

[lou2099]

If Bane wasn't completely wasted in Batman & Robin I'd have used him in the third Batman Begins-verse movie. Bane breaks Batman's back at the end and someone else takes up the mantle in the next movie.

But thanks to "Let's kick some ice" that won't happen.

[adamwest3121]

Batman already died. it happened in this video on youtube:

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

RIP BATMAN

[Shockdingo]

I vote no, I'm getting tired of death being used as a simple plot device in media as of late. Why kill him? Why not use skill to portray an open ended finality? Something like after the main quest, if has people talking of Batman and his legend through the years. "At first...he ran alone. (Footage of Batman running rooftop to rooftop in his original BB outfit) Cold, determined and solitary. But later, he changed, he grew. He gained a family. (Other members of the Bat-Family appear alongside Batman running). Through tragedy and loss the good fight continued. They never compromised, they never gave in. Even in our darkest hour...the Batman would be there." (Music builds, fades out)

See, now, my writing is not the best, but you could convey that despite this being the final film, the story continued for a long time and even, maybe imply at a death if you want. You really don't have to be boxed in and slam down the "death card" in order to close the series. It's all about artistic vision and skill. You could tell the audience, "Hey no more films, but Batman will live on, maybe re imagined someday, maybe not by this crew, but it's been a fun ride!"

I also agree that it is way too early in his career to do this. I dunno, those are my $0.02

[Oscorp]

i dont know if your serious or not, but thanks??:huh::huh:

Judging by logic, I don't think he was...

Oh, and fail on you for simply posting a picture of FAIL without stating why. That's very creative of you.

[Bathead]

I really think killing him off is a bad idea. There's something compelling about the idea that Batman's struggle is an unending one, one that he could not truly finish, even if he lived a hundred years, and that it likely will be carried on by others into the future. His story seems more epic that way.

[TheRookie311]

I like it in a way. How about batman fakes his death at the end in order to outmaneuver the joker who somehow had faked is death in two. The joker never seen in this movie other than flash backs from the second, has put together this fake criminal the riddler when somehow batman realizes that the riddler in this movie is actually a pawn of the jokers and part of the jokers big master plan to end batman.

[TheRookie311]

Batman already died. it happened in this video on youtube:

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

RIP BATMAN


Thats pretty funny shii stuff lol

[MrQuinn]

If Bane wasn't completely wasted in Batman & Robin I'd have used him in the third Batman Begins-verse movie. Bane breaks Batman's back at the end and someone else takes up the mantle in the next movie.


I dont know about the third installment, but man I've really wanted this to freakin' happen for a long time! It's such a good segway to get some other films going, not to mention to take a break from the batfilms! From there we could possibly skip the whole Robin thing, and perhaps go straight to Nightwing (such as let's say, in place of Azriel from the comics). It's a little tricky and I guess far-fetched, but I think it could work.

[returntovoid]

I don't think Batman should die in BB3, that will just turn it into a Oscar-bait film.

[CJ]

:facepalm:

This thread should've been locked after the first post.

[CaptainClown]

batman really should die....it makes the most sense.........

ha

[Fresh Prince]

Batman cannot die. He is BATMAN! He suppose to live forever and ever.

[Littledragon]

Why would Batman die??????? Gimick. Marvel's gonna die after Disney gets through with them, it would be dumb for WB or DC to kill off Batman.

[Fresh Prince]

Marvel is not gonna die by Disney. If anything Disney will help them out big time.

[Carnotaur3]

The only way I see that Batman's death could work thematically to its full effect is this:

The film opens with Batman unable to save a boy's family, Dick Grayson. Bruce, feeling just as he did when his parents were murdered, helpless and unable to prevent death, takes the young boy under his care. He connects with Dick, they share a father/son relationship. Toward the end of the film, Bruce is up against someone possibly smarter than himself. Knowing the outcome could mean certain death for him, Bruce leaves a message for Dick.

Batman does die. The city realizes the wrong they were in. And Dick is encouraged, through Bruce's letters, to continue Batman's crusade. Because corruption never dies. The war is never over as long as evil still exists.

And that's the end of the film and the Nolan series.

[AnorexicBatman]

...

THEN A HAND BURSTS OUT FROM BRUCE WAYNE'S GRAVE WITH A BLACK RING ON HIS HAND

Oh Em Gee! Perfect!

[Indrid Cold]

nuff' with the dead Batman talk.

[Angel_Faerie]

Are you guys serious? You can't kill Batman. No superhero has ever died in a superhero movie (unless you count Spawn, I guess, but that's pushing it). It'd be a very ballsy move, but no way would it ever happen.

[Indrid Cold]

Are you guys serious? You can't kill Batman. No superhero has ever died in a superhero movie (unless you count Spawn, I guess, but that's pushing it). It'd be a very ballsy move, but no way would it ever happen.

Exactly, only in the comics (and they always come back for the most part) does it work. The studios love to make the money and will re-vamp, re-boot and re-make any hero if there is a profit to be made.

[TheBatman072]

This is dumb.


Yep. Still dumb.

[CJ]

This thread made me think of this comic:

Edit: dumb rules.

[CaptainClown]

Are you guys serious? You can't kill Batman. No superhero has ever died in a superhero movie (unless you count Spawn, I guess, but that's pushing it). It'd be a very ballsy move, but no way would it ever happen.
X-men 3....there i poke a hole in your logic! :awesome:
Hellboy 2 then brought back to life

[returntovoid]

This thread made me think of this comic:

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

[Angel_Faerie]

Might wanna hurry and censor that comic. Bannable offense and all.

[Indrid Cold]

I wonder why this thread hasn't been closed yet?

[bullets]

Are you guys serious? You can't kill Batman. No superhero has ever died in a superhero movie (unless you count Spawn, I guess, but that's pushing it). It'd be a very ballsy move, but no way would it ever happen.


The t.v. Hulk died after falling out of a helicopter. That didn't turn out ot be good either .

[nightwing666]

many , many people on these boards just dont get it.Batman dead??????? A comic reader is their worst enemy. Because they think of a story for a film in a way that the comic is written and its utter crap. Plus they dont even listen to the filmmakers.

[ultrasuperduckman]

I've never bothered to look at this thread untill tonight.

Wish I hadn't.

[Fresh Prince]

They could do a BTAS episode The Man Who Killed Batman angle.

Were a petty criminal trying to become a gangster ''kills'' Batman, but really he fakes hisown death to get a idea whats going on with the drug bust.

[Two-Face]

They could do a BTAS episode The Man Who Killed Batman angle.

Were a petty criminal trying to become a gangster ''kills'' Batman, but really he fakes hisown death to get a idea whats going on with the drug bust.


That's sorta happened in TDK with Gordon, so we saw something similar to that.

[Rodrigo90]

Why should he do that?

[Fresh Prince]

That's sorta happened in TDK with Gordon, so we saw something similar to that.

Yeah I know so it be pointless now....But would of been awesome if never happened to Gordon.

[Asteroid-Man]

Well, in this way the city can truly become good which is what he initially set out to do in Batman Begins, and people will realize he was Bruce Wayne and in this way he more than honours his family.

[mothy]

the topic of this thread is absurd. if someone wants batman to die, i seriously question their fandom.

[Milu]

Batman will not, and should not, die in the next film. Why? Well . . .

Batman is one of the most bankable superheroes to put on the big screen, and Warners knows that.
It's an asinine idea.
He's the gosh-darn Batman!

[El Payaso]

Are you guys serious? You can't kill Batman. No superhero has ever died in a superhero movie (unless you count Spawn, I guess, but that's pushing it). It'd be a very ballsy move, but no way would it ever happen.

So it's basically a bad idea because it has never been done before?

I ceryainly think executives wouldn't will a character while they can squeeze one more dollar oput of it. But since when business has showed us the true way to a good film?

the topic of this thread is absurd. if someone wants batman to die, i seriously question their fandom.

Naturally. People who disagree are not true fans, period.


Batman will not, and should not, die in the next film. Why? Well . . .

Batman is one of the most bankable superheroes to put on the big screen, and Warners knows that.


Still could make a good movie.

It's an asinine idea.

Why?

He's the gosh-darn Batman!

Best reason so far! :up: :)

[jondoe]

"BATMAN After Chris Nolan" (Part 1)
Author: Mark Hughes
March 21, 2010

Christopher Nolan's recent revelations about his involvement in the next Batman film, and his specific references to an “ending,” have fueled much speculation about his intentions. Fans and the media are debating whether this means an actual "end" to Batman, either through death or retirement, or if Nolan is at least planning to end the existing film series in a way that requires another reboot of the franchise after Nolan departs. Others expect merely the end of the arcs set in motion in the previous films. I'd like to talk first about what I DON'T think Nolan is planning, and then talk briefly about what I think his comments are most likely to mean for the future of the Batman franchise after the third film. Finally, I will focus specifically on what I believe Nolan's comments might tell us about what to expect in the third Batman film.



WHAT AN "ENDING" DOESN'T MEAN
I don't think Nolan's comments about an "ending" refer to simply bringing previous arcs to a conclusion that merely has Batman accepting his role "forever" and becoming a hero again in the eyes of the city. Those will be components of the story, I believe, but are not primarily what he means by "ending" and “conclusion,” in my opinion.
However, while I do expect it to be more than simply tying up the arcs and storylines, I also suspect that some fans are so used to the way the comics sometimes resort to gimmicks like "he's dead!" or "he quits!" etc that when they hear "ending" they immediately think in terms of the way the comics often attempt to sell such concepts. People should avoid speculation that assumes obvious and contrived concepts regarding how to approach storytelling that seeks true resolution, and instead ask themselves more complex questions about these characters and the world in which they operate on film.


"Ending" things doesn't have to be so definitive that it provides such literal presentation of the concept of conclusion, and the approach to illusionary realism does not at all translate into a need to examine Batman's own mortality and for an "ending" to result in death or the cessation of everything. So in the case of Nolan's Batman films, I feel certain that Batman is not going to die or permanently retire in the third film.



It doesn't serve the story or the themes of Batman's character and the Nolan films to introduce the necessity of death in order to reach important resolutions. We've seen the importance of the growing realization that Bruce will always need to be Batman, and that he is determined to be whatever Gotham needs him to be. Part of THE DARK KNIGHT's message is that in fact his belief in an "end" where he can stop and have a normal life is not within his grasp; not only because of something within him that will always need to be Batman, but also because Gotham will always need him in one way or another. TDK ended with Gordon noting the difference between the hero the city deserves and the hero it needs right now. Batman is the hero they deserve, because he is willing to always be more than a hero and puts Gotham's needs above his own.
Likewise, The Joker's comments foreshadowing the eternal struggle between himself and Batman isn't merely about the literal fight they will continuously engage in, but is also about what each man symbolizes and how that struggle between good and evil, hope and resignation, are an eternal struggle.



Earlier in the film, The Joker tells Batman “there's no going back,” because Batman has "changed things…forever." Batman represents in this scenario a literal embodiment of the forces of good against the forces of evil, the struggle for Gotham's sanity and soul; a battle from which no retreat is now possible for either the unstoppable force or the immovable object. Batman has unleashed something in Gotham, something within men like The Joker and men like the "batmen" who take Batman's example too literally, but also within men like Gordon and Dent, and countless others who have embraced hope.



So it would be extremely contradictory for a third film to ignore these important themes, and Batman's death or final retirement would definitely represent such a contradiction. Therefore, I am convinced that Batman will still be alive at the end of the third film, and will be positioned to continue his mission as Batman.
This is all without even addressing the simple business aspects of such a decision regarding what is currently the most critically acclaimed and popular film of the genre, something no studio would allow to be ended just when it's finally taken off to such incredible heights. Warner Bros. publicly noted their desire for the Batman franchise to be one of the series that remains as a constant and dependable summer tent pole film for the studio, and I do not believe that they would forgo the continuation of the existing characterizations even after Nolan has left the series. When you have a franchise that just made more than $1 billion, you don't follow that success up with a film that ends the franchise.



WHAT DOES AN "ENDING" MEAN FOR FUTURE BATMAN FILMS?
To get a bit out of chronological order, let's now consider what Nolan's plans might mean for Batman films after the third installment.



I am pretty certain Nolan's third film will be his last of the franchise. He's made it clear that he views the third film as an ending, and I believe part of that perception is an ending to his own role in the series. Perhaps he will remain onboard as a producer or simply a consultant to help ensure the smoothest possible transition, but I am convinced he will not direct another Batman film after the third installment.



There is no chance that once Nolan departs, the studio will choose to simply end the franchise for a long time. Batman will remain a key series in Warner Bros.' plans for films that help replace the massive profits enjoyed by the last decade of Harry Potter films. They have made it clear that with the end of that series drawing near, they intend to utilize DC characters as the way to replace the revenue that will be missed after Harry Potter has run its course.



That series amounted to easily a billion dollars worth of profits from box office and DVDs for each film, not to mention other merchandising revenue. The total revenue from the Harry Potter films has been about $7.5 billion over a period of eight years, or the equivalent of almost $1 billion every year. Batman is perhaps the main franchise viewed as central to replacing this lost revenue stream, and there is simply no realistic or rational reason to expect the studio to simply stop making Batman films after Nolan departs. So Batman will continue, which means he will have to be in a position to return in a fourth film and future films -- another reason to assume Nolan's "ending" will not involve the death of Batman.



Starting with a fourth film, a new creative team will take over wherever Nolan has left off. They will not come in and reboot the franchise. The series is exactly what it needs to be, it hasn't faltered or become dated, it hasn't missed opportunities, Nolan and Warner Bros. have a great working relationship, and the series is hailed by critics, fans, and a broad mainstream audience. The existing characterization and world are far too popular and perfected for the studio to erase it after Nolan's departure. Again, referring back to the desire to recoup the sort of revenue seen from the Harry Potter series, the existing franchise foundation is rather obviously seen as a “sure thing,” and Warner Bros. will not want to mess with that success if they plan to capitalize on it for the future, as they surely do.



Anyone hoping for a reboot will surely be disappointed; and to be blunt, it seems pretty clear that the majority of audiences would want and be happy to see the series continue in the existing framework. So we are looking at a continuing franchise within the framework established by Nolan's first three films.



Since Nolan's third film is going to be some sort of significant ending to his narrative arcs, that means the new team will be able to decide on the course for Batman's series for the following several films, so they'll have a lot of leeway with themes and narratives for their stories. I do strongly believe that they will be required by Warner Bros. to work within the framework of the basic foundation laid by Nolan's films, so that future films don't contradict what took place in the first three films and doesn't ignore key elements that have made the series so popular.



What key elements? I suspect a lot of people are hoping that once Nolan departs, the series will move toward much more fantastical elements, but I believe there is a limit to how far it will be allowed to go. The term "illusionary realism" will still remain important, although future directors and writers will probably have room to stretch and prod at the boundaries. I don't expect to see any aliens or supernatural monsters introduced, nor elements that go too far into sci-fi (although obviously some sci-fi elements have been suggested by things like the sonar system, for example).
These things shouldn't be seen as restrictions, however, and instead should be treated as challenges that require imagination and creativity in order to find exciting and original ways to introduce elements that might push the boundaries, and ways to balance out the degree of illusionary realism in some areas so that the films earn greater degrees of suspension of disbelief in other areas.



So continuity of the characterizations and story will remain, as will a general desire to adhere to a perhaps looser definition of illusionary realism (or, a new creative team might potentially want to use a stricter definition, something few people seem to have considered but which I think might be true of certain possible directors, like Michael Mann for example).



The cast, however, might see some departures, including Christian Bale and Gary Oldman. I think Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman will return if they are happy with the new creative team, as might other supporting characters (Mr. Reese or Mr. Earl, for example, as well as several of the police characters). Cillian Murphy could probably be persuaded to come back, and if Ra's ever returns I suspect Liam Neeson would likewise strongly consider reprising the role.



Whatever direction and casting changes might take place, however, the certainty is that Warner Bros. will continue the franchise with the characterizations and world Nolan has created, and will expect the series to rely on Nolan's films as the foundation on which to continue the stories.




Longtime BOF'er and site contributor Mark Hughes is a screenwriter living in Maryland.
He is an avid film fan and a longtime collector and reader of comics.
http://www.batman-on-film.com/opinion_BATMAN-AFTER-Nolan-part1_markhughes_3-21-10.html


Great read! :D In short, Nolan and WB will NOT kill off and/or retire Batman, simply because it contradicts TDK's message at the end of the film of what batman stands for gotham and its people and as an end/conclusion to his 1st chapter/early career as batman, being WB's cash cow (or bat in this case :P ), and to continue on the franchise fresh from a strong foundation Nolan has provided w/ his bat-trilogy. They will not try to fix that 'ain't broke. ;)

[Two-Face]

Michael Mann as the Batman director? no no no way.

[TheBatman1]

The idea of Nolan killing off Batman in his final film is ludicrous. He wouldn't do that, Chris knows better then that. He will come up with an ending to his story that will satisfy me and the rest of the fanbase.

[batgirl]

I'd be on board with that. They're never going to stop making Batman films, no matter who's directing. And Nolan/Bale were never gonna stick around forever. The future awaits.I'm glad of it!Long live Bats!

[batman465]

This would not be a very good idea.

[Spiderine]

Maybe Bane will break his back and paralyze him for life forcing his retirement or it will simply signify an end to the overall story and themes Nolan is trying to tell. I am betting on the latter.

[Maximillian]

The results could cause a chain reaction that would unravel the very fabric of the space time continuum, and destroy the entire universe.

[Sharkboy]

I like this idea, The nolanverse is what it is, a completely different continuity from the comics, they do have the luxuary of ending the story, which they don't have in the comics. I think it would be a potential dramatic goldmine to effectively end the batman story in the 3rd film. Even if it dosent mean killing him off, giving us an ending that would "end" batman would be quite satisfying. As for sequels, they are obviously going to continue the franchise outside the nolanverse and with a different actor playing batman/bruce wayne, so it obviously wouldnt be affected by any of it.

[Two-Face]

If Batman died in the movie, I travel to WB's office and ask for a refund.

[El Payaso]

If Batman died in the movie, I travel to WB's office and ask for a refund.

Now I'm more of a Batman dying fan than ever before. :awesome:

[Squidboy]

I'd rather see him fake his death if Nolan was going to go down that road, and they could pay homage to Dark Knight Returns with Bruce leading an underground revolution to ensure that Gotham will always have a Batman to protect it (maybe he could try to train the Sons of Batman characters seen in Dark Knight).

[Closerframe]

I'd rather see him fake his death if Nolan was going to go down that road, and they could pay homage to Dark Knight Returns with Bruce leading an underground revolution to ensure that Gotham will always have a Batman to protect it (maybe he could try to train the Sons of Batman characters seen in Dark Knight).

Then we'd end up with Bale playing John Conner all over again. :hehe:

[Kurt Wagner]

Maybe Bane will break his back and paralyze him for life forcing his retirement or it will simply signify an end to the overall story and themes Nolan is trying to tell. I am betting on the latter.

I'm cool with that... so long as WB continues the franchise with Batman Beyond.

[General Vulcun]

Don't kill Batman. I feel pretty strongly about this.

[Squidboy]

Then we'd end up with Bale playing John Conner all over again. :hehe:

Oh God no. Forget I said anything.

[Panthro]

http://i697.photobucket.com/albums/vv335/fat0ninja/fail.jpg
Gotta love that image. :awesome:

[truth]

Whatever happens...let's get a director who actually makes Batman matter again and presents the character PROPERLY and makes the film about HIM...not Harvey Dent.

[Happy Jack]

Whatever happens...let's get a director who actually makes Batman matter again and presents the character PROPERLY and makes the film about HIM...not Harvey Dent.
:dry:

[hopefuldreamer]

I won't particularly mind if they do kill him off, and it could be done pretty well.

But I just don't think that the plot is going to lend itself to that.

Think about it. The whole world is going to hate him at the start of the third movie, because he's taking the blame for killing a load of people, including cops. The movie going from there to him dying at the end just doesn't seem right.

[KalMart]

I still think it can be done really well if it's handled like it was in the DKR comic...with one final apocalyptic battle to save the city, and with Wayne secretly surviving to train a new breed of secret crimefighters...like starting up the league of shadows again under his own tutelage in the Himalayas or something. Could make for a nice 'the war goes on' closing chapter. Albeit, an alternate take on the mythos...with martyrdom et al...but still the potential for some good storytelling...as well as further cementing the self-contained originality of this trilogy.

[Happy Jack]

I still think it can be done really well if it's handled like it was in the DKR comic...with one final apocalyptic battle to save the city, and with Wayne secretly surviving to train a new breed of secret crimefighters...like starting up the league of shadows again under his own tutelage in the Himalayas or something. Could make for a nice 'the war goes on' closing chapter. Albeit, an alternate take on the mythos...with martyrdom et al...but still the potential for some good storytelling...as well as further cementing the self-contained originality of this trilogy.
That's not actual death though, just Bruce faking his own death.

[Panthro]

Batman's not gonna die in the next film. Fact.

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Whatever happens...let's get a director who actually makes Batman matter again and presents the character PROPERLY and makes the film about HIM...not Harvey Dent.
Guess you never saw Batman Begins.

[KalMart]

That's not actual death though, just Bruce faking his own death.

That's what I mean though...for all in tents and purposes it could be the death of Batman, per se...certainly in the eyes of Gotham (with his identity as Wayne revealed as well). But he secretly lives on in a different role, sorta' like in DKR. So a death in a narrative/plot sense without having the characters physical body/mind die, so to speak.

I see the film starting off with a memorial service for Batman in front of city hall, with Gordon giving a speech in front of a tribute statue of Batman. Then we go back and see the events leading to that, ending the film back at the memorial after he's 'died', talking about his being Wayne and giving up everything for the city, etc. Then end with Alfred on the phone, talking with Wayne who's in the Himalayas, training a new League Of Shadows..and end the film. Something like that.

[LuisTX85]

LOL@the people over-exaggerating by saying"IF this happens then I'll go to WB and ask for a refund"/"Blow up Nolan&Bale".....YOU won't do **** But ***** on here for a very long time!.

This new Batman-movie universe belongs to Nolan!IMO,Nolan started it and I'd love for him to finish it in his own way,IF Batman fakes his death or actually dies in sacrafice then I'd be ok with it.

WB will most likely continue with the Bat films in a few years after the 3rd film even with out Nolan&Bale!.....Which I wan't a new director to do his own universe and IF it's more fantazy/crazy/fantastical like some of the comics then it would be an even better idea IMO to end the Nolan Bat movies in such way like an actual trilogy!.

[KalMart]

Okey-dokey, then.

[echostation]

I think killing Batman would be literally the stupidest idea possible...

[LuisTX85]

Even more so than nipples on his suit/Batman credit card and pretty much other stuff happening in the Bat movies?????.....(A shark attacking Batman's leg in the 60's movie/Alfred letting Vickie Vale into the Batcave/Catwoman&Penguin's origins in Returns/Two-Face&Riddler being so over the top/The whole Batman&Robin movie).

[echostation]

Yes... stupider than ALL of those

[KalMart]

Stupider than killing Obiwan in the first movie he appeared in?

[LuisTX85]

Huge comic book characters have died in the comics including Batman!,Perhaps not forever But still,And so why can't it be done in movie versions??It would be faithful to the comics in a way.

The next director will likely be doing another re-boot,Even IF he/she will do a sequel then they could say that Bruce/Batman faked his death to be in a hidden role.....Either way Bruce/Batman will return just like in the comics!.

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Huge comic book characters have died in the comics including Batman!,Perhaps not forever But still,And so why can't it be done in movie versions??It would be faithful to the comics in a way.

Joker, Penguin, and Two-Face all die in the previous series, while Ra's and the other Two-Face die in the Nolan movies.

[Jeremy Dylan]

I could work, but I have severe doubts it would happen. I would actually love for Batman to cark it and have the series continue with Michael Caine's Alfred as the protagonist, with Morgan Freeman as his partner! Two old guys beat the crap out of Gotham's underworld - I would watch that!

[LuisTX85]

Joker, Penguin, and Two-Face all die in the previous series, while Ra's and the other Two-Face die in the Nolan movies.

Yes I know,I've seen the movies!,I was talking about Batman's death in the comics and possibly in a movie.

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Yes I know,I've seen the movies!,I was talking about Batman's death in the comics and possibly in a movie.
Killing Batman in the movies then bringing him back would be just a big a cop out as it is in the comics.

[GothamAlleys]

I think it wouldnt be such a bad idea for Batman to die. It would ensure that the movie would remain a trilogy and that no other directors would come to make sequels till the horse isnt moving anymore, like they do with alien, terminator, halloween and Nightmare movies. I actually think TDK should be the last movie. Not because of the plot but I think Nolan put out such great 2 movies that he shouldnt tinker with the story anymore., I think 2 is just the right balance

[TayDee]

I always said that TDK would've been perfect if it was the third film and that the conversation he had with the joker at the end would've been a perfect way to end it because he and the joker are like the perfect relationship...but nahhh if he does die then the batman as a movie franchise will die for a while because every1 would think he's dead and that they'll be trying to bring him back from the dead

[The Joker]

They just did a Batman dies type storyline for the last year in the comics. From a character perspective, it really didn't serve a purpose other than to allow other characters to try new things in Batman's absence.

[Sith Scotti]

Batman dying would be a creative and financial disaster . Lets just stop it there

[GeometryKid]

Here's what I think they should do.

After The Dark Knight Rises, have a "Batman Beyond" film. Make it gritty - futuristic, but not toooo fantastical. It will bridge the gap between Nolanverse and a new more fantastic Batman universe. Then after a Batman Beyond film or two, return to the classic Batman with a new series.

[CrimsonDeath]

Even if Batman dies in this incarnation they can always reboot the franchise, again.
If this is the last Nolan movie, they will probably reboot it anyway.
So it should end with Bruce going to the circus and let the fans speculate forever how it would have turned out.

[CrimsonDeath]

I could work, but I have severe doubts it would happen. I would actually love for Batman to cark it and have the series continue with Michael Caine's Alfred as the protagonist, with Morgan Freeman as his partner! Two old guys beat the crap out of Gotham's underworld - I would watch that!

:up:

But Luscious should be the protagonist. Nah, let them both be the protagonists!

[fakescorpion]

As long as it works in the film.

Many fans might be angry if Batman dies in the next film, but truth is comic-book fans are still a minority in the overall movie-goers. Especially outside of America.
Many ending-elements that work for comic fans won't work for average movie-goers who never read a comic book in his/her life, including: Batman faking his death, Batman doing his job forever, someone else taking up his mantle...etc, and especially "Gotham would always need Batman".

I don't really care whether Batman dies or not, as long as it works in the content of the film. But if the story really "ends", then please let Bruce hang up the cape.
:cool:

[Mister Meddle]

Hell no. No matter how "great" Nolan is, this is something I wouldn't accept. Even if the movie turns out good I'd still disagree with this decision, no matter how it's written. Not like it's going to happen. The last I checked, the title of the movie isn't The Dark Knight Dies.

[Nevincer]

Batman should die in the next film!

Absolutely. It would be one of the best storytelling decisions in cinema history.

[Bathead]

Batman should die in the next film!

Absolutely. It would be one of the best storytelling decisions in cinema history.

No it wouldn't. It would be a cheap gimmick.

[Ultra Lantern]

No it wouldn't. It would be a cheap gimmick.



I agree with you.

[Nevincer]

No it wouldn't. It would be a cheap gimmick.
http://fim.413chan.net/art/src/130997984973-1075479-well_that_s_.jpg

[Bathead]

http://fim.413chan.net/art/src/130997984973-1075479-well_that_s_.jpg

Yes it is my opinion, and it's just as valid as anyone else's, regardless of your rather unoriginal and childish attempt to invalidate it.

[Ultra Lantern]

Everyone is allowed to express a different opinion.

[Mister Meddle]

I agree, it is cheap. How many times must a story end when the main character dies? I don't get why a legend must die in order for the story to conclude. For example look at Batman 1989. There was no need for another Batman movie because the story felt like it was complete. We witnessed the Dark Knight actually rise and become the trusted hero of Gotham.

And everyone thought the Joker died way too soon in Batman 1989. I don't agree with it but the only thing that can possibly top that is having Batman die after a couple or few years on the job. I mean.... really? I know he's human but he's supposed to be trained to avoid death. I always viewed him as the highest trained person in the world to take on all obstacles and almost appear as supernatural and immortal because of everything that he learned.

[bullets]

I've thought about it and honestly if it happens in TDKR , I will never watch that film again.

[Ultra Lantern]

I've thought about it and honestly if it happens in TDKR , I will never watch that film again.


I really don't think that Batman will die.

[bullets]

I really don't think that Batman will die.


I can't see it happening here either but some people here are actually convinced .

[Ultra Lantern]

I can't see it happening here either but some people here are actually convinced .


It only happens with Batfans.

[Nevincer]

Everyone is allowed to express a different opinion.
Unless it's Batman dying, clearly.

[Ultra Lantern]

Unless it's Batman dying, clearly.


Batman's not going to die.All the Batfans would commit suicide if he did.

[Hypestyle]

they should have dick grayson take over if batman dies..

[Ultra Lantern]

they should have dick grayson take over if batman dies..


He's not even born yet in the movie.

[DocMag]

Since Nolan's universe is a more realistic take on Batman than usual, then, in my opinion, it'd be realistic for Batman to die in TDKR. It goes against the grain on what the fans expect and what we are used to, which, if done correctly, is what makes a film memorable. In reality, heroes not only win, but they can ultimately lose. It makes sense. Batman did his best to protect Gotham and he did a damn great job putting up with the things he went through. So, if he were to die in TDKR, then he'd become a legend, be remembered, and be honored. Also, if Batman does die, then I'd prefer him dying in order to save the entire city, rather than be killed by Bane and be over with.

And all this antagonism towards each other regarding opinions is ridiculous. Just chill out. If you disagree with somebody, discuss with them, rather than talk down to them. Or just ignore them. I don't know what else to tell you!

[Kapital]

I don´t know what Nolan will do...

But i would kill the character of Batman and let Bruce Wayne be normal in his life.

Batman would die, the legend lives forever in the heart of Gotham, and Bruce Wayne let his position as gotham protector to another guy.... maybe Gordon Lewitt character.

[ThePunisher]

Maybe this is the real end of the Batman trilogy, and no more ala Spidey reboot?

[Panthro]

Maybe Batman's fate in this film doesn't really matter since we all know they'll just reboot him again a few years down the line.

[Batman4ever]

I have my own opinion. I don't think Nolan will kill off the Batman. Why? Simple it's in the title "The dark knight RISES."

[ThePunisher]

For sure, this is the ultimate NOLAN film about Batman...

[Bat-fan]

Isn't it true that Bane broke Batman's back in one of the comics, is it? Well, what an awesome end wouln't it be seeing Bats in a wheelchair by the end of this movie.

[AnneFan]

Isn't it true that Bane broke Batman's back in one of the comics, is it? Well, what an awesome end wouln't it be seeing Bats in a wheelchair by the end of this movie.

No. It would be terrible.

[KidHolland8]

Bruce dies, Blake takes over as Batman.

JGL plays batman in the next series

[Nevincer]

Isn't it true that Bane broke Batman's back in one of the comics, is it? Well, what an awesome end wouln't it be seeing Bats in a wheelchair by the end of this movie.
Would be cool, but a bit too much like First Class's ending for my liking.

[xisaacx]

Batman Beyond, that is all.

[LegendaryCaleb]

I dislike batman beyond..

[TDKR]

I think the next film is called The Dark Knight Rises because Batman dies and comes back to life.

[xisaacx]

I think the next film is called The Dark Knight Rises because Batman dies and comes back to life.


Batman is Jesus

[-Catwoman-]

No. It's not "ballsy" or groundbreaking, it's a stupid idea all the way around.

I wouldn't necessarily agree with that even though I respect your decision either way you stand.

But I think crippling Batman to the point where Batman has to quit would be a good, open ending. I don't think the last movie has to so closed ended. I would just warn other directors to never touch Nolan's Batman and they should simply come up with their own.

[uniqueweasel]

I don't understand as Batfans why anyone wants to see him die or be crippled at the end? I want to see him pushed to his limits and broken mentally, at which point he has to "rise" and overcome and kick Banes ass. Perhaps retire at the end fair enough, but Batman dying just doesn't sit right with me.

[SuperMike335!!]

I don't understand as Batfans why anyone wants to see him die or be crippled at the end? I want to see him pushed to his limits and broken mentally, at which point he has to "rise" and overcome and kick Banes ass. Perhaps retire at the end fair enough, but Batman dying just doesn't sit right with me.

Yeah, it does not feel right to end the character in such a way. I'm not seeing the purpose of that.

If anyone can explain it to me?

[lordofthenerds]

Yeah, it does not feel right to end the character in such a way. I'm not seeing the purpose of that.

If anyone can explain it to me?
I think they just want Nolan to do something different and "cutting edge".

[atak88]

The Legend that ends is the Legend of Harvey Dent.

The Dark Knight Rises is Batman being returned to a good light with the city he loves Gotham.


Batman does not die.

[Bathead]

Sounds good to me atak.

[M0n0R@y]

Why do you all want Batman to die? Just because most movies have the "hero" died doesn't mean everyone has to be the Will Smith from "I Am Legend". Even if it's accidental or sacrificial, that doesn't make them heros.

[Panthro]

Why do you all want Batman to die? Just because most movies have the "hero" died doesn't mean everyone has to be the Will Smith from "I Am Legend". Even if it's accidental or sacrificial, that doesn't make them heros.

Because they think it'll make the already dark & gritty franchise even darker and grittier than it already is, even if it makes no damn sense from a narrative standpoint.

[Steampunk Ghost]

I've thought about it and honestly if it happens in TDKR , I will never watch that film again.
agreed. i dunno why people should think that Batman should die in the film...it just doesnt make sense to me...:huh:

[Greens]

agreed. i dunno why people should think that Batman should die in the film...it just doesnt make sense to me...:huh:

Why not? Batman giving his life for Gotham would be the most heroic thing ever.

[Nevincer]

Because they think it'll make the already dark & gritty franchise even darker and grittier than it already is, even if it makes no damn sense from a narrative standpoint.

That's a horrible and unfair generalisation. It's nothing about wanting it to be darker or grittier, it's the fact that sacrificing Bruce Wayne is one of the only conceivable "non-open endings" to the paradox that is Batman and his war on crime. The other is retirement, which is also perfectly acceptable and not 'dark and gritty' at all for those of us that desire a finite ending.

[marneus]

No. It's not "ballsy" or groundbreaking, it's a stupid idea all the way around.

This.

[presidentsaad]

To the original post:

Two-Face is dead, Nolan confirmed it a while ago, get over it!

Now on the issue of the death of Batman:

Its a risk, a pretty big one if you haven't noticed already. Heres my biggest point if Batman does die: you have to make the death scene very emotional and climactic (Not that I doubt Nolan's vision, but its a tough feat). Of all the characters in Nolan's universe, the only characters that have really died are Ra's al Ghul and Two-Face. Its just very complicated to do a death scene, especially that of Batman. But, I have to note, if Batman does die, it would create a highly-emotional response from the audience (as well as some emotional music from Hans Zimmer :) ), so they could end up doing it.

In the end, they could end up doing it, or they might not. Nolan has stated that the conclusion is a very good one, so we'll just have to wait 2 months to find out!

[SuperheroFan]

To the original post:

Two-Face is dead, Nolan confirmed it a while ago, get over it!

Now on the issue of the death of Batman:

Its a risk, a pretty big one if you haven't noticed already. Heres my biggest point if Batman does die: you have to make the death scene very emotional and climactic (Not that I doubt Nolan's vision, but its a tough feat). Of all the characters in Nolan's universe, the only characters that have really died are Ra's al Ghul and Two-Face. Its just very complicated to do a death scene, especially that of Batman. But, I have to note, if Batman does die, it would create a highly-emotional response from the audience (as well as some emotional music from Hans Zimmer :) ), so they could end up doing it.

In the end, they could end up doing it, or they might not. Nolan has stated that the conclusion is a very good one, so we'll just have to wait 2 months to find out!


Don't forget Rachel Dawes, unless you're just referring to super villains.

[presidentsaad]

Don't forget Rachel Dawes, unless you're just referring to super villains.

Just realized that after I posted, thanks for the catch!

[SuperheroFan]

Just realized that after I posted, thanks for the catch!


No prob :yay:

[actionavenue]

No, I don't want to see Batman killed off. What would be the fun in that? Eventually, this franchise will be relaunched anyway by another director and another actor playing Batman. Makes no sense to me killing off an iconic superhero.
__________________________________________________ _________________
Check out my zombie blog http://freakindeadjed.blogspot.com (http://freakindeadjed.blogspot.com/).
View my scifi artwork http://zazzle.com/actionave (http://zazzle.com/actionave).

[bullets]

I was originally opposed to the idea but it does make sense in Nolanverse. I don't think it will happen though.

[Renegade5150]

Lucious Fox will die towards the end by the hands of Bane, and Batman will avenge his death and save Gotham.

[KidHolland8]

Batman shouldn't die, Bruce Wayne should

[Léo Ho Tep]

Quite the opposite actually.

[Two-Face]

No, Batman or Bruce should not die.

[Léo Ho Tep]

There shouldn't be a "should" in this kind of topic. If it fits the story, I'm ok with it.

[Art Damage]

My brother and I got into a heated discussion about what the ending of this film should be. We hope that John Blake doesn't end up taking the cape and cowl, he needs to play a Robin role in this film...if Blake ends up being Batman how does the "legend end" then? We also hope that Gotham doesn't find out that Batman has been Bruce Wayne all along, I don't like that possibility even in the context of Nolan's world.

As far as deaths go, if Bruce Wayne dies...I think that could work within the context of the story or even if "Batman" dies and Bruce Wayne is finally at peace.

[severed]

i think its too easy to kill him off, plus why would they give away the ending they are practically saying will bruce die in the commercials... bale wants to do another movie, nolan can pull off a 4th and have bruce be older and training a partner... saying its over is just hype

@artdamage- i agree

[Aggressive Sock]

It really doesn't matter if Bruce/Batman dies, whatever they do, just make it good. Make it make sense, and tell a great story either way. I can see him dying making a huge impact and if done right really making it have some weight to it. It doesn't have to be done to make a great ending though. However, there's not gonna be many times as fitting as this to do it and make it work in the stories favor.

I think part of the mystique and intrigue to this movie, is you don't know if he will die or not. The fact that Bane is the one to be able to do it, definitely adds to that possibility. Should be a fun ride.

[Léo Ho Tep]

well said. What matters is how the journey leads in an intelligent way to the ending.