Re: How much did Ledgers death change the ending of DK?
That's possible but it wouldn't have been with Nolan because he wouldn't know what to do. He didn't want to repeat TDK. What else could he have done with Joker as the main villain? That's why i think he would have been a secondary, smaller villain at the most. A cameo at the very least.
Showing him locked up, doing some scenes with Batman or some villain, would have fit him well. Hannibal Lecter style.
Having him roam around Gotham would defeat the purpose of having Batman be the villain. That's why when we all thought TDKR would start a year or two after TDK, that Riddler or Hugo Strange would be the antagonist. That type of villain. Nygma working as a private investigator or Strange as a psychiatrist in Arkham Asylum...you know, "legally". Even having Cobblepot as a pretentious owner of a club/casino who's an arms dealer behind closed doors. But no freaks, no Jokers. Batman is the face who is the villain to the public.
And that's why Joker wouldn't be main villain material for the second time.
"Lets make one thing very clear here - Nolan's films are as faithful an adaptation as there is. It pays homage to its source material, remains true to its characters and above all else places the story first and foremost." - jmc
Last edited by shauner111; 02-06-2014 at 01:43 PM.