A theory about an alternate TDKR with the Joker

[Fudgie]

If Heath was still alive Joker so would have been in this somewhere. Would have been great to have a real villain in it who wasn't doing his nasty stuff for someone else.

[Just_Human]

Originally Posted by BlueLightning

He was still a psychopathic mass murdering schizophrenic clown. Batman said it too "You'll be in a padded cell, forever." Also it's hinted in the novelization.

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

Sorta creepy.

Damn

so nobody is sure :-)

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by The Joker

I think I'm going to keel over with shock. Anno just criticized something about TDKR.

Hah. I have complaints with TDKR, but just not as much as a lot of others, plus I don't share them as much as others as well. To name a few, I wish the final act of TDKR was longer to give us a full view of Talia being a villain rather than her reveal, then her death, as well as Foley shouldn't have even been in TDKR at all, the last which is something I have mentioned many times, lol.

Then you should have had no problem with Crane helping them should you since he was heavily involved with them in Batman Begins.

The fact that he did work with the LoS in the past is the fact that I didn't like Crane being back again, seemingly working for the LoS once more. Plus, it didn't make sense for someone from Arkham Asylum to be out and yet another person that was sent there isn't shown at all(Joker). I understand if Nolan didn't want to mention Joker, but at least don't bring in someone else that is supposed to be locked up in Arkham as well.

No they weren't. They were set free as part of the liberation from the corrupt. As we've discussed time and again Bane's plan never ever hindered on this because he discovered the Dent lie by accident. So claiming they were supposed to take over the city is a falsity. As the army guy said to Bane's man on the bridge, he had not got the man power to stop 30 million people from leaving if they wanted to. It was the army that kept them in thanks to the bomb threat.

Giving the prisoners guns and ammunition seemed like yes, they were going to be the ones policing Gotham City and taking it over as they even worked hand in hand with the League once they were free. With that, yes, I still say it seems like Bane was just letting the prisoners run wild and take the city as their own.

You're either paying Ledger the biggest compliment, or giving Nolan and the rest of TDK's and TDKR's cast the biggest insult.

No question that The Joker is the most memorable character from it, but he is not the ONLY memorable character in it. Take a look at all the awards and accolades TDK got; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...he_Dark_Knight

177 awards and nominations, and only 38 of them are specific to Ledger. TDK is as acclaimed as it is because it's a great movie. Simple as that

But yet, still everyone talks about Joker during TDK. I'm not saying TDK is an awful movie nor am I giving an insult to anyone else onboard TDK besides Ledger, but only Joker is singled out as the best thing in TDK, especially is these forums. Even to the point of comparing the next film's villain, Bane, to Joker whenever they can. I'm not saying anything bad about TDK at all, you're just taking it as that, lol. But you can't deny that Joker isn't usually the main reference when someone speaks of TDK.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by BlueLightning

He was still a psychopathic mass murdering schizophrenic clown. Batman said it too "You'll be in a padded cell, forever." Also it's hinted in the novelization.

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

Sorta creepy.

"Not even Selina."

Why would they say this? Why, if anybody, would it be Selina that would know?

[BatLobsterRises]

I think it's because Selina is portrayed as very street smart and "in the know" when it comes to that sort of stuff. I mean considering she is currently the best working theif in Gotham, she might have even had a "professional respect" for Joker being able to hit a mob bank and get away clean.

[The Eradicator]

Originally Posted by Wesley Dodds

Nyaaah. That Lector-esque, "hero works with imprisoned villain" thing is so cliched.

You're right to a certain extent, but just imagine Bale's Bruce and Heath's Joker sharing a prison cell. That would have given TDKR an entirely different kind of psychological depth. It wouldn't just be about the villain helping out the hero but rather the hero learning something existential about himself from his arch-nemesis on a very personal level.

Think of the all the possible scenarios that could have played out from this.

Originally Posted by ChocheTheHero

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

Brilliant. If Joker had been in the film, I could TOTALLY see something like this happening.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

The fact that he did work with the LoS in the past is the fact that I didn't like Crane being back again, seemingly working for the LoS once more.

But why? He has a history with them. They trusted him to do the job they gave him to do. Why was it so bad to see him working with them again?

Plus, it didn't make sense for someone from Arkham Asylum to be out and yet another person that was sent there isn't shown at all(Joker). I understand if Nolan didn't want to mention Joker, but at least don't bring in someone else that is supposed to be locked up in Arkham as well.

So your only problem with it is in relation to the Joker? Did it ever occur to you that one of two scenarios could have happened;

1. It's 8 years later. Crane could have served his time and have been released
2. Bane had him specifically released because of his previous affiliation with the LOS

Giving the prisoners guns and ammunition seemed like yes, they were going to be the ones policing Gotham City and taking it over as they even worked hand in hand with the League once they were free. With that, yes, I still say it seems like Bane was just letting the prisoners run wild and take the city as their own.

Bane was letting everyone who wasn't rich or a Cop run wild on the streets. The Blackgate inmates were just part of the so called victims of the corrupt.

If he had never learned of the Dent lie, they would have stayed put in prison. Their release was never crucial to taking over Gotham. The bomb threat was what gave Bane his power to own Gotham. Not the inmates or his LOS men.

But yet, still everyone talks about Joker during TDK. I'm not saying TDK is an awful movie nor am I giving an insult to anyone else onboard TDK besides Ledger, but only Joker is singled out as the best thing in TDK, especially is these forums. Even to the point of comparing the next film's villain, Bane, to Joker whenever they can. I'm not saying anything bad about TDK at all, you're just taking it as that, lol. But you can't deny that Joker isn't usually the main reference when someone speaks of TDK.

Yes, Joker is the most talked about element in it, but I equate it to Hannibal Lecter who is the most talked about character in The Silence of the Lambs, but the movie has a lot more going for it than Lecter's 20 minutes of screen time.

Lecter is like the Joker, the large than life scenery chewing Oscar winning villain of the piece.

[Fudgie]

Originally Posted by The Eradicator

Brilliant. If Joker had been in the film, I could TOTALLY see something like this happening.

Heh I would have loved to see Bane get pwned by Joker. Less humiliating than Catwoman doing it.

Originally Posted by The Joker

But why? He has a history with them. They trusted him to do the job they gave him to do. Why was it so bad to see him working with them again?



So your only problem with it is in relation to the Joker? Did it ever occur to you that one of two scenarios could have happened;

1. It's 8 years later. Crane could have served his time and have been released
2. Bane had him specifically released because of his previous affiliation with the LOS



Bane was letting everyone who wasn't rich or a Cop run wild on the streets. The Blackgate inmates were just part of the so called victims of the corrupt.

If he had never learned of the Dent lie, they would have stayed put in prison. Their release was never crucial to taking over Gotham. The bomb threat was what gave Bane his power to own Gotham. Not the inmates or his LOS men.



Yes, Joker is the most talked about element in it, but I equate it to Hannibal Lecter who is the most talked about character in The Silence of the Lambs, but the movie has a lot more going for it than Lecter's 20 minutes of screen time.

Lecter is like the Joker, the large than life scenery chewing Oscar winning villain of the piece.

Quoted for truth.

Joker is just about as iconic as Batman is.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by The Joker

But why? He has a history with them. They trusted him to do the job they gave him to do. Why was it so bad to see him working with them again?

He has a history of being a pawn in a plan that the League of Shadows never told him about as Crane only believed they were going to hold the city hostage. Wouldn't call that a great history, but even then...how would Bane, or even Talia, know that Dr. Crane used to work with Ra's?

So your only problem with it is in relation to the Joker? Did it ever occur to you that one of two scenarios could have happened;

1. It's 8 years later. Crane could have served his time and have been released
2. Bane had him specifically released because of his previous affiliation with the LOS

Neither of those occurred since 2 wasn't even mentioned or hinted to even make sense of it all and 1 could lead to questioning about how the gas that Crane inhaled was "resolved". Perhaps Carmine Falcone, over time, could have become better as well?

Bane was letting everyone who wasn't rich or a Cop run wild on the streets. The Blackgate inmates were just part of the so called victims of the corrupt.

If he had never learned of the Dent lie, they would have stayed put in prison. Their release was never crucial to taking over Gotham. The bomb threat was what gave Bane his power to own Gotham. Not the inmates or his LOS men.

I also believe the inmates would have stayed in Blackgate prison as well, but he DID give the inmates guns when they walked out and they DID end up helping out the LoS throughout those five months wether it was escorting people out of the kangaroo court into the river of ice or targeting cops(as the man who Christopher Judge played had regular criminals that didn't wear the red scarfs with him when they met with Blake). So in the end, the inmates did play a pivotal role in "taking over" the city.

Yes, Joker is the most talked about element in it, but I equate it to Hannibal Lecter who is the most talked about character in The Silence of the Lambs, but the movie has a lot more going for it than Lecter's 20 minutes of screen time.

Lecter is like the Joker, the large than life scenery chewing Oscar winning villain of the piece.

And this is what I am referring to. With Joker being the major talk of TDK, don't you think it would have been the same with TDKR even? Ledger's Joker was simply a fascinating character and villain and would've been the "talk of the town" even as a minor villain in TDKR.

[Fudgie]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

Neither of those occurred since 2 wasn't even mentioned or hinted to even make sense of it all

Heh that shouldn't bother ya man considering some of the wild ass theories I've seen you champ that the flick doesn't mention or hint.

and 1 could lead to questioning about how the gas that Crane inhaled was "resolved". Perhaps Carmine Falcone, over time, could have become better as well?

Batman made a cure in Begins mon ami. Remember he got Lucius to make one.

And this is what I am referring to. With Joker being the major talk of TDK, don't you think it would have been the same with TDKR even? Ledger's Joker was simply a fascinating character and villain and would've been the "talk of the town" even as a minor villain in TDKR.

Dayum. Ya think the J-Man is that powerful that even a smaller role would have made him the toast of the flick?

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by Fudgie

Heh that shouldn't bother ya man considering some of the wild ass theories I've seen you champ that the flick doesn't mention or hint.

Oh, I get it....you're trying to make a funny of the past things I've said...oh, you...clever, clever you...

Batman made a cure in Begins mon ami. Remember he got Lucius to make one.

Did the cure ever get to Crane or did we hear anything about the cure being handed over to the inmates in Arkham Asylum? If they did, I don't understand how Carmine Falcone was still locked up in there during the events of TDK.

Dayum. Ya think the J-Man is that powerful that even a smaller role would have made him the toast of the flick?

Did having the little time he did in TDK make him the "toast of the flick"? It's only speculative that a cameo would be the talk of the town, but it'd very possible. It's be hard to deny this, don't ya think?

[Anita18]

Originally Posted by The Eradicator

You're right to a certain extent, but just imagine Bale's Bruce and Heath's Joker sharing a prison cell. That would have given TDKR an entirely different kind of psychological depth. It wouldn't just be about the villain helping out the hero but rather the hero learning something existential about himself from his arch-nemesis on a very personal level.

Think of the all the possible scenarios that could have played out from this.

That would have been pretty fascinating, but why the heck would Joker help out Batman and help his new playmate escape?

[Victarion]

....How would the GA and yourselves have reacted if Nolan had Bane use Arkham as the Pit for the people he wanted tortured? Only, instead of nameless nobodies (Joker excluded), you'd see low-tier freaks like Croc, Zazz, and anyone else you care to name. We wouldn't have seen most of them on-screen prior to TDKR, so I don't know if critics would call it pointless or what.

[TheBat812]

I do not think Joker would have been in TDKR in any major role either way. His job as a character was done. In a film that was destined to seek Bruce's catharsis, he just wouldn't have been a very good fit in a natural way. Sure, it's easy to write a small cameo, but I really do not think they would have wanted to keep him in there for the sake of it.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wooden Alligator

....How would the GA and yourselves have reacted if Nolan had Bane use Arkham as the Pit for the people he wanted tortured? Only, instead of nameless nobodies (Joker excluded), you'd see low-tier freaks like Croc, Zazz, and anyone else you care to name. We wouldn't have seen most of them on-screen prior to TDKR, so I don't know if critics would call it pointless or what.

Zsaz would be cool to see, by anyone else famously known in Batman's rogue gallery would be pointless because A.) We never saw Batman taking them out or B.) Batman may not have even taken them out since he was retired.

[Victarion]

Yeah, my idea would mean they need to leave the date of Batman's disappearance ambiguous or move it to two years after Dent died.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

He has a history of being a pawn in a plan that the League of Shadows never told him about as Crane only believed they were going to hold the city hostage.

And what do you call him handing out sentences in a plan where he doesn't know the city is going to be blown up?

A pawn again.

how would Bane, or even Talia, know that Dr. Crane used to work with Ra's?

The same way they knew he attacked Gotham before, and knew that Bruce Wayne was Batman.

Neither of those occurred since 2 wasn't even mentioned or hinted to even make sense of it all

Given the tiny role he had, did you expect there to be some exposition on how he was there? The city is under control of Bane. Anyone could have been set free by him.

and 1 could lead to questioning about how the gas that Crane inhaled was "resolved".Perhaps Carmine Falcone, over time, could have become better as well?

Bruce and Fox made an antidote to Crane's toxin in Begins. Fox made it after Bruce had been gassed. He took a sample of his blood and synthesized an antidote. Bruce told him to go back to W.E. and mass produce it because the Police were going to need loads of it.

I also believe the inmates would have stayed in Blackgate prison as well, but he DID give the inmates guns when they walked out and they DID end up helping out the LoS throughout those five months wether it was escorting people out of the kangaroo court into the river of ice or targeting cops(as the man who Christopher Judge played had regular criminals that didn't wear the red scarfs with him when they met with Blake). So in the end, the inmates did play a pivotal role in "taking over" the city.

That's not a pivotal role in taking over the city. The city was taken over before Bane even broke them out. What you just described was them carrying out mundane duties during the siege.

The city would still be taken over whether they were there or not. No pivotal role in that was played on their part.

And this is what I am referring to. With Joker being the major talk of TDK, don't you think it would have been the same with TDKR even? Ledger's Joker was simply a fascinating character and villain and would've been the "talk of the town" even as a minor villain in TDKR.

I don't want to under sell the other actors in the movie by saying I think all it would take is a few minutes of screen time from Ledger's Joker to rob all of the other characters of any spotlight.

Of course there would have been buzz for him doing an encore performance. Can't deny that. But to say he would have been the focal point of all the movie's talk even with a small role, that I do not believe.

Originally Posted by TheBat812

I do not think Joker would have been in TDKR in any major role either way. His job as a character was done. In a film that was destined to seek Bruce's catharsis, he just wouldn't have been a very good fit in a natural way. Sure, it's easy to write a small cameo, but I really do not think they would have wanted to keep him in there for the sake of it.

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

David Goyer said he thinks if Heath was still alive it would have been a "no brainer" about whether or not Joker would have been in the sequel.

[Victarion]

The catch is--you would have some people saying he was underused. The key would be to make the majority of the Joker's scenes iconic, just as they did with the majority of Batman's sparse scenes.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by The Joker

And what do you call him handing out sentences in a plan where he doesn't know the city is going to be blown up?

A pawn again.

Didn't know I said anything about Crane not being a pawn again, but I say that it didn't work for me seeing as how Crane was used once by the LoS. Simply put, Crane didn't need to return at all. It was a nice cameo(I recall laughing a bit when I saw Cillian Murphy on the screen even when I knew he was going to be in TDKR) as much as it was in TDK, but it would've been totally fine if Crane wasn't used in the threequel.

The same way they knew he attacked Gotham before, and knew that Bruce Wayne was Batman.

By past members of the League during Ra's' run?

Given the tiny role he had, did you expect there to be some exposition on how he was there? The city is under control of Bane. Anyone could have been set free by him.

I think it would've been best for a little explanation of how Crane got out of Arkham Asylum.

Bruce and Fox made an antidote to Crane's toxin in Begins. Fox made it after Bruce had been gassed. He took a sample of his blood and synthesized an antidote. Bruce told him to go back to W.E. and mass produce it because the Police were going to need loads of it.

And you presume the antidote was used on Arkham's inmates as well? Then explain how Carmine Falcone is still in the asylum during the events in TDK. Falcone should've been in a prison cell after being cured.

That's not a pivotal role in taking over the city. The city was taken over before Bane even broke them out. What you just described was them carrying out mundane duties during the siege.

The city would still be taken over whether they were there or not. No pivotal role in that was played on their part.

Policing the city with the LoS members isn't a pivotal role in taking over a city and keeping martial law to continue?

I don't want to under sell the other actors in the movie by saying I think all it would take is a few minutes of screen time from Ledger's Joker to rob all of the other characters of any spotlight.

Of course there would have been buzz for him doing an encore performance. Can't deny that. But to say he would have been the focal point of all the movie's talk even with a small role, that I do not believe.

It's much speculative to suggest, though. Joker, even with 40 minutes, is the main talk of TDK and even a cameo could be the same thing. And let alone, the cameo of Joker would even come to the table when people compare Joker to Bane, which the cameo would probably only help Joker more.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

Didn't know I said anything about Crane not being a pawn again, but I say that it didn't work for me seeing as how Crane was used once by the LoS. Simply put, Crane didn't need to return at all. It was a nice cameo(I recall laughing a bit when I saw Cillian Murphy on the screen even when I knew he was going to be in TDKR) as much as it was in TDK, but it would've been totally fine if Crane wasn't used in the threequel.

So basically your only problem with it is you didn't think it was necessary. I agree. But given the context of Crane's relationship with the LOS in the past, there was nothing logically wrong with him doing it or being there.

The movie wouldn't have suffered one tiny bit if his cameo wasn't in it.

By past members of the League during Ra's' run?

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

I think it would've been best for a little explanation of how Crane got out of Arkham Asylum.

Nolan often gets accused over expository dialogue when it's unnecessary. This is one time where he didn't use it when it was unnecessary. Bane was in control of the city. You saw him bust out 1000 Blackgate inmates. Did you really need to be told how he got Crane out of Arkham?

And you presume the antidote was used on Arkham's inmates as well?

Of course. Do you think Batman would just let them run around in a drug induced frenzy?

Then explain how Carmine Falcone is still in the asylum during the events in TDK. Falcone should've been in a prison cell after being cured.

Harvey's line was "With Carmine Falcone in Arkham someone must have stepped up to run the so called family".

Nothing to suggest Maroni didn't step the next day, next week, or what ever after Falcone was put in Arkham and his empire left to crumble.

Policing the city with the LoS members isn't a pivotal role in taking over a city and keeping martial law to continue?

No, it's not. The city was already taken over. Bane's power came from the fact that he had the bomb. As long as he had that he was untouchable. Everyone except Gordon and Batman bought his fib that he gave the trigger to an ordinary citizen. Though technically he did since Tate was considered that.

To reiterate again, Bane's plan was never reliant on any man power from the Blackgate inmates.

It's much speculative to suggest, though. Joker, even with 40 minutes, is the main talk of TDK and even a cameo could be the same thing.

How can you compare the leading villain role to a cameo?

And let alone, the cameo of Joker would even come to the table when people compare Joker to Bane, which the cameo would probably only help Joker more.

A villain comparison was going to happen no matter what. The sequel villains always get compared to their predecessors. Just like the movies do.

[Llama_Shepherd]

I thought that Bane would have loosed Joker out upon the city.

I think this because, thematically, Bruce goes through a different arc to the Gotham characters and city, despite Bane saying he will torture them both in the same way: their soul, via false hope.

Bane feeds Bruce hope by putting him in an open prison, that he is allowed to attempt to escape. He feeds Gotham hope by seizing it away from the corrupt, and returning it to the people. Bruce loses his hope because he cannot make a jump that a child could. Gotham loses hope because.......

Nothing visibly happened other than people stayed indoors, however, given Joker was likely a part of the formation of the Dent Act, he would have been freed, perhaps to deliver Gordon's speech, and have a reign of terror that removes Gotham's hope, perhaps it would be Joker that Robin stands up to, rather than Chris Judge. Then Joker, Batman and Robin could have had a scene together, where Joker gets to say his hello's and goodbyes. Batman shouldn't have a final soiree without Joker.

[AnneFan]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

I think it's because Selina is portrayed as very street smart and "in the know" when it comes to that sort of stuff. I mean considering she is currently the best working theif in Gotham, she might have even had a "professional respect" for Joker being able to hit a mob bank and get away clean.

Yeah. If she wanted to know, or if it concerned her, she'd dig out the details. Selina had been in and out of institutions, and knowing the system in and out, and who could be under her roof, would be beneficial given her lifestyle. She became aware of clean slate, which was a mysterious item.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by The Joker

So basically your only problem with it is you didn't think it was necessary. I agree. But given the context of Crane's relationship with the LOS in the past, there was nothing logically wrong with him doing it or being there.

The movie wouldn't have suffered one tiny bit if his cameo wasn't in it.

We are in agreement, but are still discussing as if we're in disagreement? Lol.

I for one would have thought Crane was smart enough to not become a pawn to the LoS again, but perhaps when Crane was gassed in BB, he lost all of his brain cells.

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

Lol, well I ran into that one head first. You're right, it was most definitely past LoS members.

Nolan often gets accused over expository dialogue when it's unnecessary. This is one time where he didn't use it when it was unnecessary. Bane was in control of the city. You saw him bust out 1000 Blackgate inmates. Did you really need to be told how he got Crane out of Arkham?

Yes, I did. Especially when it's only one person from Arkham.

Of course. Do you think Batman would just let them run around in a drug induced frenzy?

Well seeing as how Carmine Falcone is stuck in Arkham Asylum still by TDK's events, I'd say yes.

Harvey's line was "With Carmine Falcone in Arkham someone must have stepped up to run the so called family".

Nothing to suggest Maroni didn't step the next day, next week, or what ever after Falcone was put in Arkham and his empire left to crumble.

You're not getting my point. With Falcone still being in Arkham, it would suggest that the antidote Fox created and expanded was not used on Arkham's inmates.

No, it's not. The city was already taken over. Bane's power came from the fact that he had the bomb. As long as he had that he was untouchable. Everyone except Gordon and Batman bought his fib that he gave the trigger to an ordinary citizen. Though technically he did since Tate was considered that.

To reiterate again, Bane's plan was never reliant on any man power from the Blackgate inmates.

Just the way how the criminals were working with the League of Shadows, even without knowing about their true intentions of destroying Gotham and the LoS sacrificing themselves, they were still carrying around from orders and working alongside the members of the LoS with different scenarios. I'm not saying Bane's plan relied on the Blackgate prisoners, only that with having these prisoners, they aligned themselves with the LoS and working alongside with them throughout those five months.

How can you compare the leading villain role to a cameo?

The same way how Joker is already being compared to Bane. He's the most talked about villain of the entire trilogy, so why wouldn't he still be even as a cameo? You're telling me you wouldn't bring up Joker's cameo as much as you can when discussing TDKR even if you still didn't like the film?

A villain comparison was going to happen no matter what. The sequel villains always get compared to their predecessors. Just like the movies do.

Yep, which would be made even more if Joker had a cameo in TDKR.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

We are in agreement, but are still discussing as if we're in disagreement? Lol.

No, it just took several posts for you to say it was a personal preference, and not something that was contradictory or written badly.

I for one would have thought Crane was smart enough to not become a pawn to the LoS again, but perhaps when Crane was gassed in BB, he lost all of his brain cells.

Since the LOS was under new management, not to mention actually running the whole city, I'd say the circumstances to BB are rather different wouldn't you?

Yes, I did. Especially when it's only one person from Arkham.

Then I am very miffed why you needed to know how Bane could have broken out a former employee of the LOS when he was in control of the whole city. You are perfectly willing to conjure up unsupported wild theories about Batman being active in the 8 year gap, but you need to know how a terrorist with an army and a city under his control just released one inmate from Arkham.

Unbelievable.

Well seeing as how Carmine Falcone is stuck in Arkham Asylum still by TDK's events, I'd say yes.

Who said he was still in there in TDK?

You're not getting my point. With Falcone still being in Arkham, it would suggest that the antidote Fox created and expanded was not used on Arkham's inmates.

You're going to have to remind me who said he was still in Arkham. Dent said with Falcone in Arkham someone must have stepped up to run the family. What makes you think he didn't mean when Falcone was in Arkham in BB or shortly after that's when Maroni took over?

Just the way how the criminals were working with the League of Shadows, even without knowing about their true intentions of destroying Gotham and the LoS sacrificing themselves, they were still carrying around from orders and working alongside the members of the LoS with different scenarios. I'm not saying Bane's plan relied on the Blackgate prisoners, only that with having these prisoners, they aligned themselves with the LoS and working alongside with them throughout those five months.

Yeah, not denying they were working with the LOS. But your claim that they were pivotal in taking over Gotham is 100% false for the reasons already mentioned.

The same way how Joker is already being compared to Bane.

Anno, are you familiar with superhero fans and how they react to movies? Should I go and dig up numerous threads from the Spidey forums where the villains in Raimi's trilogy are compared?

Fans always compare villains, just like they compare movies. You act as though this is a first for fans comparing Bane and the Joker.

He's the most talked about villain of the entire trilogy

Because to most people he is the best. Naturally the most popular villain will be the most talked about.

so why wouldn't he still be even as a cameo?

Because he's not the main role. Willem Dafoe's Norman is certain more popular than Sandman and Venom in SM-3, yet do you hear people constantly talk about his mirror cameo more than the other characters?

You are really over dramatizing the nature of a cameo.

You're telling me you wouldn't bring up Joker's cameo as much as you can when discussing TDKR even if you still didn't like the film?

Yes, I'm telling you that. You know I like Begins more than TDKR. How much do you hear me talk about Neeson's cameo? Or Crane's?

Yep, which would be made even more if Joker had a cameo in TDKR.

Despite past history with other movies giving cameos to more popular characters not being the case.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by The Joker

No, it just took several posts for you to say it was a personal preference, and not something that was contradictory or written badly.

Even though I never said it was written badly? Lol.

And while it doesn't contradict anything, it is simply a bit of a pull back reaction to see Crane being the only Arkham inmate out of Arkham.

Since the LOS was under new management, not to mention actually running the whole city, I'd say the circumstances to BB are rather different wouldn't you?

Not at all. Is Crane still being some pawn without knowing the true intention of the LoS as was the case in BB?

Then I am very miffed why you needed to know how Bane could have broken out a former employee of the LOS when he was in control of the whole city. You are perfectly willing to conjure up unsupported wild theories about Batman being active in the 8 year gap, but you need to know how a terrorist with an army and a city under his control just released one inmate from Arkham.

Unbelievable.

Hey, not everyone can have the same exact opinions as you do. I know it's hard to understand, but I do find it more settling that Batman could have been still in action until the Dent Act was created as opposed to Bane and his men deciding to release one inmate from Arkham who was only a pawn to the League's plan when Ra's was alive. And to release said Arkham inmate to only perform as a judge in a kangaroo court when anyone could've been in that role, as even a member of the LoS.

Who said he was still in there in TDK?

Dent said while he's in Arkham Asylum, someone(Maroni) took control of the mob. It would be most logical to suggest Falcone is still in Arkham Asylum, otherwise it would've been mentioned while in court that Falcone is now in prison.

You're going to have to remind me who said he was still in Arkham. Dent said with Falcone in Arkham someone must have stepped up to run the family. What makes you think he didn't mean when Falcone was in Arkham in BB or shortly after that's when Maroni took over?

It would also make sense to say Falcone is in prison now, though. Or he could have simply said while Falcone was away in prison rather than Arkham if Falcone is given the antidote and was sent to prison. Would it be necessary to mention Falcone's stay in Arkham, given the time table for him to be cured would have been perhaps a week's time after BB's events?

Yeah, not denying they were working with the LOS. But your claim that they were pivotal in taking over Gotham is 100% false for the reasons already mentioned.

They became pivotal in helping the League. That is 100% fact that they became a valuable part in helping out the League's plans. Otherwise, they wouldn't have been helping the League at all.

Anno, are you familiar with superhero fans and how they react to movies? Should I go and dig up numerous threads from the Spidey forums where the villains in Raimi's trilogy are compared?

Fans always compare villains, just like they compare movies. You act as though this is a first for fans comparing Bane and the Joker.

I act as that? Just by saying Joker is already being compared with Bane? By saying 'already', I think you could understand that I am aware already they're being compared. Maybe I should have used bold...

Because to most people he is the best. Naturally the most popular villain will be the most talked about.

Such as he would be even in a little cameo moreso then the main villain. It's silly to not say this won't happen.

Because he's not the main role. Willem Dafoe's Norman is certain more popular than Sandman and Venom in SM-3, yet do you hear people constantly talk about his mirror cameo more than the other characters?

You are really over dramatizing the nature of a cameo.

Seems as though you're giving Joker less credit just because it would have been a cameo. You are aware of how fans are, right?

Plus, you're speaking on a film that has zero praise for any of the villains, or zero praise for pretty much anything. You sure that's a good example?

Yes, I'm telling you that. You know I like Begins more than TDKR. How much do you hear me talk about Neeson's cameo? Or Crane's?

I'm saying if Joker was in TDKR. You would have kept talking about his cameo even with a film you didn't like.

Despite past history with other movies giving cameos to more popular characters not being the case.

Such as...?