The Dark Knight Is Batman to blame for Harvey's death too?

[Mr. Earle]

Why have him killed in a cleaner way? So it can be just like every cliche superhero movie ala the Spider-Man deaths? Harvey's fall was symbolic. Batman was the one who pushed him, saving Gordon's kid. Both fell. Only one gets up (the true hero), yet he has to lie to preserve the reputation of the villain. That's Nolan for you.

Yeah right. You found a "deep" explanation to counter the failure.

Excuse me but batman could have used a batarang to hit his hand, grab his hand, or whatever to stop dent. Perhaps Dent could have stumbled on something and fell along with Gordon's son giving batman time to save only one of them.
Whatever.
The point is, batman threw both of them.
Its like throwing Alfred and the Joker from a tower. Gee....i wonder who he will save?

So dont give me that "the true hero rised" bullcrap. Nolan is to blame. Along with 9/11 (or is it too soon to joke about it?). He could have chosen a better death for Dent, one that wouldnt involve batman.

Just like the scene with Ras: "dude, i dont have to save you". Thats bullcrap as well. Because batman always saves everyone he can, whoever he is. I read "joker's advocate" recently where the joker is sentenced to death about a crime he did not commit (gee....what about all the others?) and batman works tirelessly to prove his innocence because in this case, he was! He didnt go: "durr, i dont have to save you joker!"
That being said, the way batman escaped the doomed train was freaking awesome, but it could have been handled in a better way. Like Ras rejecting Batman's help or something, giving batman no choice to save him. The thing is that there was no way for batman to open the glider while holding ras and thats why they chose to leave him behind.
My solution to the above problem: Just hit a button at the back of the belt and turn the cape to glider so that batman can glide without using his hands to grab it. He wouldnt be able to do many maneuvers but he could resort to that in emergencies (like saving someone from falling to the pavement....DING DING!!!)

 

[El Payaso]

"I won't kill you...but I don't HAVE to save you."

He didn't purposefully kill Dent, but he wasn't about to save him over Gordons son either.

He did purposedly push Dent to what he knew was a long long fallen.

 

[goh78]

You got to read deeper - all you hear is "Harvey Dent is dead". Speaking metaphoricaly, the man who was Harvey Dent is dead. Everything he could do, all the potential he had, his girlfriend, his job, his world, all dead and gone.

The thing, Harvey Two-Face, more commonly known as Two-Face, is alive and festering.

You wait and see, I'll show ya.

Batman does not kill, period. Not on purpose, not by accident, because the man does not have accidents. If he had killed Harvey then that would be the end, he would turn himself in to make Harvey an ever bigger martyr.

Can you imagine the shock on everyones face, the unexpected return, the wailing "but you told me he was dead". The unbelieveableness will rock your world and amaze and delight you. That is what Nolan is about - not just satisfying the consumer, but absolutely delighting the consumer 150%. If you think the third movie is going to be "ho-hum, another villian to capture, Batman faces an identity crisis" then you don't know nothing about Nolan. You have to think outside the box, beyond outside the box, way beyond your Truman Show world, to just begin to grasp where the next movie is going to come from.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/featuresnews.php?id=7641 Dude, your only setting yourself up for disappointment.... This "Truman Show" world you speak of is reality, and excepting something when the actor himself says he's not coming back.... But I guess I "don't know nothin about Nolan" All these people saying Two Face will be back...what else do you need to see to understand he won't....Eckhart said he's not coming back.

 

[Stringer]

I figured everyone though Dent died in the hospital explosion, therefore putting the death on the Joker.

 

[Two-Face]

Yes Batman is to blame for Two-Face's death, if TF wasn't death he will be around killing other cops or some else then killing himself after.

Either way, Two-Face would be dead.

 

[jtfaria]

Harvey Dent is not dead!!! No way, no how, no death.

There are a lot of self-righteous clowns on this system who've been quick with the condescending "get over it" putdowns re Harvey's death, especially after Nolan told Aaron Eckhart that his character was dead.

Well, I hate to break it to the Bozo-boys, but Harvey's NOT dead. That is, he's not dead in the sense that he won't appear in a Batman film ever again.

Fact is, Two-Face has died before. Remember? You should, it was only 3 films ago.

Little light go on now? One of the better-known villains in comics WILL be back. Of course he will. Maybe not in the next movie, but not long after, either. He will be back, one way or another. He'll have been hidden away somewhere, or it'll be a series reboot, or it'll be some other ruse.

Anyone who doesn't get THAT just hasn't been paying attention.

 

[Paradyme]

I figured everyone though Dent died in the hospital explosion, therefore putting the death on the Joker.

They could definitely spin it that way but obviously the truth will come out in the third film either way. Either the Riddler will expose it or the cop that survived will.

 

[drunkhomer]

Joker did say he was going to have to break his one rule

Alfred did say Bruce was being something more, he's not being a hero

 

[GregComicFan]

This thread needs to get back on track or else it will be a copy of other "Harvey/Two-Face" threads on this board.

My original question was....

Two-Face is dead. Will Batman, in Gotham's eyes, be blamed for his death and hunted because of it, in additional to the 5 others?

I want to know how Gordon is going to explain Harvey being dead to the public.

 

[ThePoisonPuppet]

There are a lot of self-righteous clowns on this system who've been quick with the condescending "get over it" putdowns re Harvey's death, especially after Nolan told Aaron Eckhart that his character was dead.

Well, I hate to break it to the Bozo-boys, but Harvey's NOT dead. That is, he's not dead in the sense that he won't appear in a Batman film ever again.

Fact is, Two-Face has died before. Remember? You should, it was only 3 films ago.

Little light go on now? One of the better-known villains in comics WILL be back. Of course he will. Maybe not in the next movie, but not long after, either. He will be back, one way or another. He'll have been hidden away somewhere, or it'll be a series reboot, or it'll be some other ruse.

Anyone who doesn't get THAT just hasn't been paying attention.

Of course he will come back in a reboot. No one ever denied that. Thats just stupid to think that Nolan killed the character forever but no one thinks that.

And I would say either The Joker killed Harvey in the abandoned building or he died in the hospital explosion. They will still have to silence Ramirez it seems, though its not like anyone would believe her story anyways. I mean no one would believe one person claiming Dent went insane and killed people as opposed to just blaming it all on Batman/Joker which seems more logical really.

 

[metalhead_dave]

Yeah right. You found a "deep" explanation to counter the failure.

Excuse me but batman could have used a batarang to hit his hand, grab his hand, or whatever to stop dent.

Okay... how about if you get mauled by dogs while being kicked by a psychopath, beaten with a steel pipe, and then shot in the abdomen? Then try to throw a batarang at a gunman's hand to knock the said gun away. Tell me how easy it is.

Even if it hit Harvey's hand, what if the gun went off and hit the guy he was pointing it at... Gordon?

 

[I Am The Knight]

Of course he will come back in a reboot. No one ever denied that. Thats just stupid to think that Nolan killed the character forever but no one thinks that.

And I would say either The Joker killed Harvey in the abandoned building or he died in the hospital explosion. They will still have to silence Ramirez it seems, though its not like anyone would believe her story anyways. I mean no one would believe one person claiming Dent went insane and killed people as opposed to just blaming it all on Batman/Joker which seems more logical really.

I think he was being facetious...

 

[Team Andino]

I would say that Gordon could say Dent died in the hospital explosion but all those cops who stormed the building with dogs are bound to find dents body there with a gun, even if Gordon hides the gun there's still Dents body to worry about. Remember Gordon had police surround the building for the sake of building a perimeter outside and they knew the "situation" not the person doing it though. While that was happening Batman was probably finishing up with Joker or already on his way.

The people that do know about the truth is
Batman
Gordon + family
Ramirez
Joker
Dent (if hes not dead)

I may be over thinking this but we did see the Snipers with Gordon on top of that building react to Gordon when he blatantly said "Dent?" on the phone so they might have an idea that somethings up. Plus with this being a "realistic environment" I imagine there will be people and cops alike who don't believe Batman did any of this and have a feeling that the issue is much deeper then is publicly known.


Out of all of them everyone with the exception of Joker will keep quite as Ramirez would fear being know as a dirty cop as only Dent knew about the truth with her and shed be to scared to face cops or mob with bringing up details about the truth. Joker would probably find it amusing that Batman would take the heat for all the deaths to only protect Dents rep. It wouldn't take long for Joker to reveal the truth about what happen. I feel if Ledger was alive the plot for the 3rd film would have Joker get out of jail, reveal the truth which would clear Batman's name but tarnish Dents and yet Batman would still need to redeem himself. Knowing the Joker from TDK I'm sure he'd have some way to prove the truth an cause more damage to a beatin down city thats limping with only the memory of Dent

 

[BubbaGump]

Yeah right. You found a "deep" explanation to counter the failure.

Deep? The ending of the film and "the fall of Harvey Dent" was hinted all throughout the movie. It wasn't subtle at all. You'd have to be an idiot not to realize it or figure out why Nolan decided to end Dent's life that way.

Excuse me but batman could have used a batarang to hit his hand, grab his hand, or whatever to stop dent. Perhaps Dent could have stumbled on something and fell along with Gordon's son giving batman time to save only one of them.
Whatever.

Yay. Cliche batarang to hand. Got any more screenplay scenarios for us?

So dont give me that "the true hero rised" bullcrap. Nolan is to blame. Along with 9/11 (or is it too soon to joke about it?). He could have chosen a better death for Dent, one that wouldnt involve batman.

The true hero rised bullcrap was the entire point of the movie. Nolan is not a literal filmmaker. You actually have to dwell on the outcome of his film. Think a little. Interpret it for yourself. It's what makes these films fun to discuss.

You take yourself way too seriously.

 

[Mr. Earle]

Deep? The ending of the film and "the fall of Harvey Dent" was hinted all throughout the movie. It wasn't subtle at all. You'd have to be an idiot not to realize it or figure out why Nolan decided to end Dent's life that way.



Yay. Cliche batarang to hand. Got any more screenplay scenarios for us?



The true hero rised bullcrap was the entire point of the movie. Nolan is not a literal filmmaker. You actually have to dwell on the outcome of his film. Think a little. Interpret it for yourself. It's what makes these films fun to discuss.

You take yourself way too seriously.

I am not a writer so i dont have any innovative ideas to propose. But batarang to hand has never been done before in a film. And on the other hand, people are always asking for him to use them. In any case, batman kinda broke his one rule there.
Oh no wait, Nolan is such a great filmaker, there has to be another explanation for this! Yes, it was all a symbolism about saving the environment and how the melting icecaps would mean the death of millions!

My god i see it now! The symbolism is so strong that i would have accepted batman shooting dent between the eyes.

Christ! I know that the true hero is batman and that dent had to die so that batman would have to take the blame, but all i am asking is for it to have happened in a subtler way. The fact that batman is the real hero doesnt mean that he can shove the villain from a balcony!

 

[UA-Archangel]

Ramirez is still alive to know the truth about Dent...who knows...

She's shown herself to be corruptable, so given a promotion or so.

She'll keep it to herself.

 

[Ekricket]

She's shown herself to be corruptable, so given a promotion or so.

She'll keep it to herself.

When you have already killed one, what's a few more.......

This is the reason why Batman cannot have killed Dent. Where's the line between him and the criminals then? He already breaks all the rules - KIDNAPS people off of foreign soil, blows up cars and buildings that get in his way when he is in a hurry, beats the crap outa people, hides his money from the IRS to fund his night time activities, lies to everyone around him, steals technology and bends it to his own use, - and now he kills people too? How do you reconcile that? It's all good because he "means well"?

There has to be a limit, a point where he cannot bend anymore without breaking completely. If he can outright kill now, start being judge, jury, and executioner, then he is well on his way to becoming a rabid dog, and no better than those he claims to be protecting Gotham from. I mean now, he does not have to be creative and figure ways to capture criminals without harming innocents. Now the end justifies the means, so if a few innocents get killed in the line of him "meaning well" because it is easier to kill than it is to think or plan your way out of a situation,..... I mean where are we now?

 

[TomPiltoff]

I am not a writer so i dont have any innovative ideas to propose. But batarang to hand has never been done before in a film.

That doesn't make it a good idea.

Oh no wait, Nolan is such a great filmaker, there has to be another explanation for this! Yes, it was all a symbolism about saving the environment and how the melting icecaps would mean the death of millions!

So you equate symbolism with touchy-feeling nonsense. Hmm.

 

[NEONINJA007]

i would say no

 

[myway]

I've tried posting this elsewhere but the ever-wise mods closed my threads and directed me here. As you can tell, I don't think it belongs here but whatever. Isn't Batman's plan to hide the truth about Harvey's transformation into Two Face counterproductive because now the people will be lead to think that Batman, another figure that they've been inspired by, became a cop killing psychopath? Batman's mission, from as early as "Begins" was to become something bigger than a man; a symbol to inspire people. I know Batman says he realizes that he can't be the hero Gotham needs but I just don't buy reasoning or like it one bit. So Batman becomes a hero, inspires change, then taints his image to protect someone else's image; to what end? So he can step down as Batman? Sounds like a cowards way out to me.

 

[TomPiltoff]

Harvey did it all without a mask, though.

Batman would rather see people inspired by the straight, by-the-books Harvey Dent rather than an anonymous vigilante.

 

[Lemenbolle]

Joker would probably find it amusing that Batman would take the heat for all the deaths to only protect Dents rep. It wouldn't take long for Joker to reveal the truth about what happen. I feel if Ledger was alive the plot for the 3rd film would have Joker get out of jail, reveal the truth which would clear Batman's name but tarnish Dents and yet Batman would still need to redeem himself. Knowing the Joker from TDK I'm sure he'd have some way to prove the truth an cause more damage to a beatin down city thats limping with only the memory of Dent

Does Joker really know the truth, though? He would be able to guess that Ramirez and Wuertz would be in trouble, knowing the dirty cops, , but he does not know exactly WHAT happened.. For instance, Maroni was probably killed in the car accident, and the driver caught a bullet. A bullet that came from Joker's gun, given to Dent.

I've tried posting this elsewhere but the ever-wise mods closed my threads and directed me here. As you can tell, I don't think it belongs here but whatever. Isn't Batman's plan to hide the truth about Harvey's transformation into Two Face counterproductive because now the people will be lead to think that Batman, another figure that they've been inspired by, became a cop killing psychopath? Batman's mission, from as early as "Begins" was to become something bigger than a man; a symbol to inspire people. I know Batman says he realizes that he can't be the hero Gotham needs but I just don't buy reasoning or like it one bit. So Batman becomes a hero, inspires change, then taints his image to protect someone else's image; to what end? So he can step down as Batman? Sounds like a cowards way out to me.

What I always had in mind was that if Dent's actions were revealed, all the criminals he helped put in jail would be free or retrialed (you get my drift?). Batman mentioned this when he found Dent threatening the schizofrenic Joker goon.

 

[myway]

What I always had in mind was that if Dent's actions were revealed, all the criminals he helped put in jail would be free or retrialed (you get my drift?). Batman mentioned this when he found Dent threatening the schizofrenic Joker goon.

Yeah, I understood his motivations I'm just not sure that his plan is a great solution. One way to look at it though is as a friend pointed out to me, the cops who got killed were crooked so if it leaked out that the cops Batman supposedly killed were crooked, maybe that would salvage his image.