How would Bales Batman react to Jacks Joker and Keatons B-Man to Ledgers Joker?

[Ace of Knaves]

How many times does Batman in the comics dwell on Jason and Barbara over the times he was able to stop the Joker?

I was talking about Joker not dwelling on it.

 

[metalhead_dave]

I've got too much to do in the next few minutes to rebuff your entire argument, but I will answer one point you are making.

Does Joker realize he's alone? He was convinced that once Gotham saw what he did to Harvey, they'd all crack and lose hope. And when Joker hears Batman took the blame for Harvey's crimes, then Joker will know he was right. Otherwise why would Batman cover for Harvey?

Why would Batman cover for Harvey? Maybe so that the 500 inmates that Harvey put away would stay in jail and not have the chance to appeal. Remember what Harvey and the Mayor were talking about?

 

[The Joker]

Why would Batman cover for Harvey? Maybe so that the 500 inmates that Harvey put away would stay in jail and not have the chance to appeal. Remember what Harvey and the Mayor were talking about?

Gordon: "The Joker won. He took the best of us and tore it down. People will lose hope"

Batman: "But the Joker cannot win"

That is the crux of why Batman took the blame. Yeah, the thugs Harvey locked up could have appealed, but the main reason he did it was to keep hope in Gotham. And I say again, they could have just blamed the Joker for Harvey's crimes, instead of Batman making himself a wanted murderer.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Gordon: "The Joker won. He took the best of us and tore it down. People will lose hope"

Batman: "But the Joker cannot win"

That is the crux of why Batman took the blame. Yeah, the thugs Harvey locked up could have appealed, but the main reason he did it was to keep hope in Gotham. And I say again, they could have just blamed the Joker for Harvey's crimes, instead of Batman making himself a wanted murderer.

Not at the end. Everyone knew the Joker couldn't have been the one that caused the "situation" with Gordon's family. They couldn't blame that incident on the Joker, because Gordon had already left to find his family while everyone knew the Joker was still in the building overlooking the ferries.

 

[The Joker]

Not at the end. Everyone knew the Joker couldn't have been the one that caused the "situation" with Gordon's family. They couldn't blame that incident on the Joker, because Gordon had already left to find his family while everyone knew the Joker was still in the building overlooking the ferries.

It doesn't have to be the actual Joker himself who did it. Just like he didn't actually murder the Judge and Commissoner Loeb in person. He could have organised those murders Harvey committed without actually participating in them himself.

They could have said some of Joker's hoods took Gordon's family hostage, but fled when they heard the Cops arrive. Very simple. And nobody is going to doubt the word of Commissoner Gordon. Especially if his wife backs him up, too.

 

[Infinity9999x]

It doesn't have to be the actual Joker himself who did it. Just like he didn't actually murder the Judge and Commissoner Loeb in person. He could have organised those murders Harvey committed without actually participating in them himself.

They could have said some of Joker's hoods took Gordon's family hostage, but fled when they heard the Cops arrive. Very simple. And nobody is going to doubt the word of Commissoner Gordon. Especially if his wife backs him up, too.

I can see your point for the other murders, but for the ending scene, it's just too hard to overlook. Gordon's men had already surrounded the area, the thugs wouldn't have been able to get away unnoticed.

And it would be more then a little fishy that Dent just happened to be at the same spot, and somehow died there, with apparently no connection to Gordon's family.

Had the area not been surrounded by Gordon's men, I would have agreed with you, but the area was closed off, Gordon couldn't just make up some guys because the cops obviously would have seen them.

 

[The Joker]

I can see your point for the other murders, but for the ending scene, it's just too hard to overlook. Gordon's men had already surrounded the area, the thugs wouldn't have been able to get away unnoticed.

Of course they would have. Batman nearly did, and he was there for ages after the Police arrived. The Police only surrounded the front, not the back. That's why they had to chase Batman. They were coming in from the front of the building. He had his Bat Pod parked out the back.

And it would be more then a little fishy that Dent just happened to be at the same spot, and somehow died there, with apparently no connection to Gordon's family.

Batman could have taken Harvey's body out of there. He could have easily hid somewhere with Harvey's body in that big building. Gordon could have covered for him and cleared his men out of there, telling them that Joker's hoods were gone.

He even could have sent his men on a wild goose chase after them in the wrong direction. It would have been so easy. He's the Commissoner of Police. It was his family that was abducted. Nobody would have questioned him.

 

[metalhead_dave]

Of course they would have. Batman nearly did, and he was there for ages after the Police arrived. The Police only surrounded the front, not the back. That's why they had to chase Batman. They were coming in from the front of the building. He had his Bat Pod parked out the back.

Batman could have taken Harvey's body out of there. He could have easily hid somewhere with Harvey's body in that big building. Gordon could have covered for him and cleared his men out of there, telling them that Joker's hoods were gone.

He even could have sent his men on a wild goose chase after them in the wrong direction. It would have been so easy. He's the Commissoner of Police. It was his family that was abducted. Nobody would have questioned him.

Eh, I wouldn't have liked it if they did something like that, blaming. I mean it may have been smart, but it would also be kind of cowardly... using someone even as deranged as the Joker to be a pawn like that.

The fact that Batman took the blame for the crimes seemed like a much more noble act.

Now as far as this is concerned.

Gordon: "The Joker won. He took the best of us and tore it down. People will lose hope"

Batman: "But the Joker cannot win"

That is the crux of why Batman took the blame. Yeah, the thugs Harvey locked up could have appealed, but the main reason he did it was to keep hope in Gotham. And I say again, they could have just blamed the Joker for Harvey's crimes, instead of Batman making himself a wanted murderer.

Let me give the whole dialouge for you.

Gordon: "The Joker won. Harvey's prosecution, everything he fought for... undone. Whatever chance you gave us of fixing our city... dies with Harvey's reputation. We bet it all on him. The Joker took the best of us and tore it down. People will lose hope."

Batman: "They won't. They must never know what he did."

Gordon: "Five dead. Two of them cops. You can't sweep that up."

Batman: "But the Joker cannot win. Gotham needs it's true hero. You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain. I can do those things."

His reasons are a little bit of A and a little bit of B.

I could rebuff you on your other points about the "Joker being 2 steps ahead for the entire film, including the ending." But I really don't feel like it. Debating stuff like that was what made me leave CBR. You feel they weren't equals, I feel Batman steped up in the end. We'll leave it at that.

Besides... your just biased because you share Joker's namesake.t:

 

[The Joker]

Eh, I wouldn't have liked it if they did something like that, blaming. I mean it may have been smart, but it would also be kind of cowardly... using someone even as deranged as the Joker to be a pawn like that.

Why? In a way, Joker is to blame for those crimes. He is the one that corrupted Harvey. He is the one that used those people that Harvey murdered to kill Rachel.

The fact that Batman took the blame for the crimes seemed like a much more noble act.

It was noble, but completely unnecessary.

Let me give the whole dialouge for you.

Gordon: "The Joker won. Harvey's prosecution, everything he fought for... undone. Whatever chance you gave us of fixing our city... dies with Harvey's reputation. We bet it all on him. The Joker took the best of us and tore it down. People will lose hope."

Batman: "They won't. They must never know what he did."

Gordon: "Five dead. Two of them cops. You can't sweep that up."

Batman: "But the Joker cannot win. Gotham needs it's true hero. You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain. I can do those things."

His reasons are a little bit of A and a little bit of B.

Bruce: "Remember that day you once told me about, when Gotham would no longer need Batman?"
Rachel: "Bruce, you can't ask me to wait for that"
Bruce: "It's coming. It's happening now. Harvey is that hero. He locked up half of the city's criminals, and he did it without wearing a mask. Gotham needs a hero with a face"

Batman to Harvey: "You're the symbol of hope I can never be"

All thru the movie, it's hammered into us that Harvey is giving the city the kind of hope Batman never could. In my opinion, the weight of Batman's reasoning for taking the blame for Harvey's crimes was to keep hope alive in Gotham. The criminals that are set free can be recaptured. But they can't bring back hope if what Harvey did as Two Face is revealed.

I could rebuff you on your other points about the "Joker being 2 steps ahead for the entire film, including the ending." But I really don't feel like it. Debating stuff like that was what made me leave CBR. You feel they weren't equals, I feel Batman steped up in the end. We'll leave it at that.

I'm sorry, man, I didn't mean to put you off posting in here. I was just looking for a good discussion/ debate

This multi posting does get a bit much sometimes, but us geeks just have alot to say usually

Besides... your just biased because you share Joker's namesake.t:

LOL! I am usually guilty of that, but not here, I assure you. I love Ledger's Joker with every fibre of my being, but I would have preferred Batman to have been on a bit more equal footing with the Joker.

It's a minor complaint for me. The Dark Knight is still one of my all time favourite movies, and my favourite comic book movie.

 

[metalhead_dave]

I'm sorry, man, I didn't mean to put you off posting in here. I was just looking for a good discussion/ debate

This multi posting does get a bit much sometimes, but us geeks just have alot to say usually

You didn't put me off at all. I just don't feel like burning energy to counter what you said. I did so much of that in CBR because there were SO many nitpickers that I got burnt out. But you don't need to be sorry.

Maybe one day I will have alot to say about some matter haha. Once I posted something long enough to match an eight page essay.

I love Ledger's Joker with every fibre of my being, but I would have preferred Batman to have been on a bit more equal footing with the Joker.

I stated before that I'd like to see a movie where Batman is already expierenced with the Joker and takes him on again. I'm sure Heath would want the show to go on. Maybe Nolan could do an Encore 4th movie and bring the Joker back.

It could be The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight 2, and the Dark Knight 3 with Batman Begins as a "Hobbit" like Prequel.

Now I'm just going off on a tangent.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Of course they would have. Batman nearly did, and he was there for ages after the Police arrived. The Police only surrounded the front, not the back. That's why they had to chase Batman. They were coming in from the front of the building. He had his Bat Pod parked out the back.

Gordon said they set up a perimeter, that usually means you're circling around the building, not just standing in front of it. And we really don't know where Batman's bat-pod was in relation to the building. He ran off to the side from Gordon, and the next we see him zig zagging through those large barrel like things.

The only reason he got away was because the bat-pod was hidden around all those storage units. The police didn't notice it, and even when he drove off, there were police waiting to give pursuit, because the last shots showed them chasing him on the road. Thugs would have a normal car, and it would have been noticed by the police.

Batman could have taken Harvey's body out of there. He could have easily hid somewhere with Harvey's body in that big building. Gordon could have covered for him and cleared his men out of there, telling them that Joker's hoods were gone.

He even could have sent his men on a wild goose chase after them in the wrong direction. It would have been so easy. He's the Commissoner of Police. It was his family that was abducted. Nobody would have questioned him.

Batman could barely walk, he wouldn't have had enough time to hide Harvey's body somewhere before the police got to him. Also, the police had dogs with them, and I'm pretty sure they would have smelled the body.

All that aside, having Batman and Gordon simply cover up Harvey's death and blaming it on the Joker wouldn't have been a smart choice story wise. In general, people wouldn't like it. It casts the characters as cowardly, and it wouldn't have been as satisfying an ending. Is it realistic? Not really, but it's a story, and the storyteller wanted to get a certain message across. It wasn't necessary to have many things that happened in TDK happen, but it's all part of the story.

 

[The Joker]

Gordon said they set up a perimeter, that usually means you're circling around the building, not just standing in front of it.

If there was a perimeter, then where were they when Batman went running off? They should have been right there to head him off if they were circled around the building.

But we only see them chasing him from behind. You see the Cops out the front saying "Ok, we're going in" and they go running around the side of the building. Go to 8:23 on this video: http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=pOTnahK3hBw

If that's a perimeter, then I'm Mother Teresa

And we really don't know where Batman's bat-pod was in relation to the building. He ran off to the side from Gordon, and the next we see him zig zagging through those large barrel like things.

Go to 8:10 on this: http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=pOTnahK3hBw

He didn't run off to the side. He ran straight ahead away from the building. Gordon and his kid have their backs to the building and are looking straight ahead at Batman.

The Bat pod was parked at the back of the building among those storage containers.We see the Cops with the dogs chasing him thru them like 10 seconds later.

The only reason he got away was because the bat-pod was hidden around all those storage units.

And a car or motorcycles could easily be hidden among them, too. There was loads of those large storage containers.

The police didn't notice it, and even when he drove off, there were police waiting to give pursuit, because the last shots showed them chasing him on the road.

Ummm, they never showed any Cops chasing him on the road. You just see him driving thru the streets. Watch it on that video I posted. And the reason the Police never noticed it is because they were not there out the back. We see them at the front, and only the front.

Batman could barely walk, he wouldn't have had enough time to hide Harvey's body somewhere before the police got to him.

What are you talking about? LOL! We saw Batman RUN away.

Also, the police had dogs with them, and I'm pretty sure they would have smelled the body.

You're trying to say that if Batman took Harvey up to, lets say the top of the building and hid, and this is a Batman stealthy enough to to walk right up to the Joker unnoticed in a crowded party, and the dogs would have smelled him all the way up there?

Not to mention Gordon could have just told them all to clear out and chase the thugs that are getting away. Come on, lets not be ridiculous here.

All that aside, having Batman and Gordon simply cover up Harvey's death and blaming it on the Joker wouldn't have been a smart choice story wise. In general, people wouldn't like it. It casts the characters as cowardly, and it wouldn't have been as satisfying an ending.

Rubbish!

The Joker is the one that blew half of Harvey's face away. The Joker is the one who killed Harvey's girlfriend. The Joker is the one who corrupted Harvey into doing all this. There would have been nothing cowardly about blaming those crimes on him.

 

[Infinity9999x]

If there was a perimeter, then where were they when Batman went running off? They should have been right there to head him off if they were circled around the building.

But we only see them chasing him from behind. You see the Cops out the front saying "Ok, we're going in" and they go running around the side of the building. Go to 8:23 on this video: http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=pOTnahK3hBw

If that's a perimeter, then I'm Mother Teresa



Go to 8:10 on this: http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=pOTnahK3hBw

He didn't run off to the side. He ran straight ahead away from the building. Gordon and his kid have their backs to the building and are looking straight ahead at Batman.

The Bat pod was parked at the back of the building among those storage containers.We see the Cops with the dogs chasing him thru them like 10 seconds later.



And a car or motorcycles could easily be hidden among them, too. There was loads of those large storage containers.



Ummm, they never showed any Cops chasing him on the road. You just see him driving thru the streets. Watch it on that video I posted. And the reason the Police never noticed it is because they were not there out the back. We see them at the front, and only the front.



What are you talking about? LOL! We saw Batman RUN away.



You're trying to say that if Batman took Harvey up to, lets say the top of the building and hid, and this is a Batman stealthy enough to to walk right up to the Joker unnoticed in a crowded party, and the dogs would have smelled him all the way up there?

Not to mention Gordon could have just told them all to clear out and chase the thugs that are getting away. Come on, lets not be ridiculous here.



Rubbish!

The Joker is the one that blew half of Harvey's face away. The Joker is the one who killed Harvey's girlfriend. The Joker is the one who corrupted Harvey into doing all this. There would have been nothing cowardly about blaming those crimes on him.

You're right about Batman running away, I think it's because it shows him running next to all those pillars that I thought he was running along side of the building, instead of away from the one Gordon was at. And with the cops chasing him, for some reason I was thinking that they showed cop cars behind him when he was driving away, I'm not sure why I imaged that.

And when I said he could barely walk, I should have said he wasn't moving well, because he was obviously limping as he ran away.

But really, as I said above, I think the general public would look at Batman and Gordon's actions as slightly cowardly. Hiding Dent's body, having the Joker take the blame for Dent's actions, it just doesn't send off the same message. I think the general public would prefer Batman taking the fall because it's more "noble." And, as I said above, that's the message Nolan wanted to get across, and, in the end, why anything happens in a movie.

Of course, I suppose we can't really be sure about how the audience would react to Batman and Dent covering everything up unless we did a massive poll, but that's just my opinion.

Actually, I would have liked a more morally ambiguous ending like the one your suggesting, if they had left Two-Face alive. Have Batman and Gordon hide the body, then when they go back to find Two-Face, he's gone. It would give Two-Face more motive, and more leverage, to extract revenge on Batman, and Gordon especially. It would definitely tarnish his "good cop" image with the public if they found out he tried to cover up Harvey's death.

 

[The Joker]

You're right about Batman running away, I think it's because it shows him running next to all those pillars that I thought he was running along side of the building, instead of away from the one Gordon was at. And with the cops chasing him, for some reason I was thinking that they showed cop cars behind him when he was driving away, I'm not sure why I imaged that.

And when I said he could barely walk, I should have said he wasn't moving well, because he was obviously limping as he ran away.

But really, as I said above, I think the general public would look at Batman and Gordon's actions as slightly cowardly. Hiding Dent's body, having the Joker take the blame for Dent's actions, it just doesn't send off the same message. I think the general public would prefer Batman taking the fall because it's more "noble." And, as I said above, that's the message Nolan wanted to get across, and, in the end, why anything happens in a movie.

Of course, I suppose we can't really be sure about how the audience would react to Batman and Dent covering everything up unless we did a massive poll, but that's just my opinion.

I definitely agree with you that what Batman did was very noble and selfless. That was never in dispute with me. I'm just pointing out that it was unnecessary. He didn't have to take the fall.

And personally, I don't think the general audience would dislike Gordon or Batman for pinning those crimes on the man who destroyed Harvey's life, and manipulated him into doing those crimes.

I understand what Nolan was doing. Nolan wanted to show Batman's commitment to Gotham City, and present a new obstacle for Batman to face in the sequal.

Actually, I would have liked a more morally ambiguous ending like the one your suggesting, if they had left Two-Face alive. Have Batman and Gordon hide the body, then when they go back to find Two-Face, he's gone. It would give Two-Face more motive, and more leverage, to extract revenge on Batman, and Gordon especially. It would definitely tarnish his "good cop" image with the public if they found out he tried to cover up Harvey's death.

That would have been great

 

[The Batman]

sigh....it dont matter which guise, grin/ratwings/whatever always finds a way to go overboard in his love of nolan and ends up gettin the axe...

Seriously....the idea of keatons batman being broken by ledgers joker has got to be one of the most hilarious things ive ever heard.....keaton's Batman is already freakin cracked, what the hell could ledger do to him psycologically?

Oh yeah...

Nothing.

as mentioned before, if both jokers switched worlds, ledger's joker would be street pizza and nicolson's joker would be in a street jacket.

 

[ray243]

The public in those movie is different.

One is more pro-hero, basically hero-worship without giving a second thought, while TDK public do have an opinion of their own.

 

[El Payaso]

^ What do you mean? B89 public is pro-hero/hero worship?

 

[The Navigator]

The public in those movie is different.

One is more pro-hero, basically hero-worship without giving a second thought, while TDK public do have an opinion of their own.

On what do you base this? Gotham hated Keaton's Batman in Returns, and there wasn't a public opinion in B89.

 

[The Joker]

and there wasn't a public opinion in B89.

Well, not until the end of the movie, anyway. Although the newscaster did say Gotham was still unsure if Batman was a friend or a foe after he'd cracked Joker's poison code.

 

[The Navigator]

Well, not until the end of the movie, anyway. Although the newscaster did say Gotham was still unsure if Batman was a friend or a foe after he'd cracked Joker's poison code.

Good point.
I also forgot about the part where Vicki says "Some people think you're [as psychotic] as the Joker." So yeah, pretty much not the mindless hero-worshiping crowds at all.

 

[El Payaso]

Good point.
I also forgot about the part where Vicki says "Some people think you're [as psychotic] as the Joker." So yeah, pretty much not the mindless hero-worshiping crowds at all.

 

[metalhead_dave]

Good point.
I also forgot about the part where Vicki says "Some people think you're [as psychotic] as the Joker." So yeah, pretty much not the mindless hero-worshiping crowds at all.

Those crowds are in Batman and Robin.

Gossip Gertie: "You must be new, Batman and Robin protect us."

 

[Ibn]

Were the hell do you get off criticizing old man Roegele for not giving credit where credit is due when you post stuff like this?

Keaton would've snapped Ledger's neck in their first meeting after going to work on him with a pair of pliers and a blow torch.

Bale would've never created the Joker in the first place and Jack Nicholson would be in jail after his stunt on Axis chemicals.

t:

Everything he said.

LOL! Yeah, I don't think there'd have been much hesitation with the one rule there.

I can see that **** now.

Joker: "But what about your ONE RULE?!"

BatKeaton: *Straps Joker in his chair in a room full of gasoline"

"..........................Things Change!"

 

[The Navigator]

Those crowds are in Batman and Robin.

Gossip Gertie: "You must be new, Batman and Robin protect us."

Which is not Keaton's era, and so doesn't count. Like that film as a whole.

If Ledger's Joker didn't sabotage Keaton's Batmobile, I think Keaton would f**k him up with it. I mean, let's face it, Keaton flame-broiled a guy that just blew fire at his car! What he would do to the Joker....well, that's almost unimaginable.

 

[Ibn]

but who would win in a fight? superman or wolverine?

jesus.

t: HAHAHA