The Dark Knight Rises Roven: Joker Could Return

[Bathead]

I hope you're joking, otherwise......
:facepalm

 

[Symbiotic]

Others could include seasoned actors who have played other popular roles before which require good sound pitch voice modulation... here's the rest of my list:

Matthew Lillard (Shaggy)

Jaleel White

Dougray Scott (who takes up the mantle, quiet, discerning in his master performance in MI 2, a real dastardly villain who is very evil)

Hugh Grant

John Travolta

Ben Kingsley

Jonathan Frakes

These guys would be superb with years of prior acting experience...

I disagree with the entire list, but Urkel doesn't belong anywhere near a Batfilm.

 

[BurnZy]

what about Robert De Niro? or Eddie Murphy? or even Aaron Eckhart, hear me out... think about it, Two Face may come back and so when he does he then becomes even crazier and paints one half of his face in joker make up and takes on the role of the Joker... Economic filmmaking with having two villains back into one. Mr Eckhart is a great talentedey actor who could easily do both roles so well together... Think about it, he could argue with himself (note Gollum) and see who wins and comes up with better points on wrecking the city while Batman has to stop the Joker who he can't seem to find (cuz it's actually TWO FACE!!!)

Others could include seasoned actors who have played other popular roles before which require good sound pitch voice modulation... here's the rest of my list:

Matthew Lillard (Shaggy)

Jaleel White

Dougray Scott (who takes up the mantle, quiet, discerning in his master performance in MI 2, a real dastardly villain who is very evil)

Hugh Grant

John Travolta

Ben Kingsley

Jonathan Frakes

These guys would be superb with years of prior acting experience...

Wow, that's a totally great idea.

Where is the "sarcasm" smiley face??

 

[Laderlappen]

He's obviously trolling.

 

[BaleISBatman4ev]

It's Simple: James Franco!

/thread

 

[Rasputin911]

lol....two-in-one

+ =

 

[8wid]

The only way he is coming back are in clips from trial and sentencing to Arkham. Case closed.

 

[regwec]

Clearly not.

 

[Bathead]

The only way he is coming back are in clips from trial and sentencing to Arkham. Case closed.

Really? Case closed,huh? When did Nolan tell you this?

 

[GregComicFan]

I have said this again and again and I will keep saying it until Batman 3 comes out and then I can go "HAHAHAHA! I told you so I told you so!!!!!"

...

my prediction...

The Joker will NOT be seen. The Joker will NOT be heard.

The Joker WILL be felt.

Batman 3 will still be recovering from the Joker's rampage. The Joker's presence will be felt due to the lives he changed/destroyed.... remember, everything was CAUSED by the Joker (Harvey turning into Two-Face, Two-Face going nuts, Harvey dead, Batman on the run, Batman now a killer)... the Joker will be felt/referenced because 1) he's still alive 2) Gordon, Bruce, Harvey, etc... they were all dramatically effected by him. Gotham's underworld will be dealing with what the Joker did (he basically dismantled and destroyed them, killing some of them and burning all their money)....and Gotham itself will be in a panic since a terrorist (two, if you count Ras Al Ghul) basically drove the citizens to flee for their safety.

I'm willing to place money on Nolan NOT using any CGI wizardry or technology or Heath's voice or "old footage" or "Joker hidden in the shadows and played by someone else"... or any of that garbage. He will simply use GOOD STORYTELLING to turn the Joker into the "boogie man" of Gotham, still felt, still feared, still a presence, but not seen/heard at all.

Greg

 

[regwec]

To be fair, that is a fairly obvious cop out, and plenty of people have suggested it.

 

[GregComicFan]

To be fair, that is a fairly obvious cop out, and plenty of people have suggested it.

Oh I agree the idea is not original. I'm sure other people believe the Joker will be "felt" and not "seen/heard". I'm just a total subscriber to that idea AND I bet I/we will be proven correct come the release of Batman 3.

And I don't think it's a cop-out. I think it's logical.

 

[Ryan]

I can see your point of view Greg. I mean if Dark Knight has some 911 underpinnings to it you can see how our world has changed and changed and changed again while Osama has rarely been heard or seen. With all of the economic turmoil changes in government, mood of the country, I could see it all directly or indirectly being linked to 911. I'm really doubting Joker will be heard from again. The only footage I can think of that was shot with Leger that was not used was when he left the party in failed attempt to get Harvey Dent. Not sure there's enough there to justify it being used and be meaningful

 

[GregComicFan]

I just think hearing the Joker laugh... or seeing his shadowy outline inside of a cell inside Arkham Asylum... would just be really cheap... really dumb... really pointless... and also not classy at all because it would just be reminding the audience that Heath Ledger is dead and unable to return to the role.

 

[regwec]

And I don't think it's a cop-out. I think it's logical.

Sure. I didn't intend to be rude there; I thought I would just remind you that your views are broadly shared, and that many would claim some sort of victory if that approach was taken in pt 3.

 

[GregComicFan]

Sure. I didn't intend to be rude there; I thought I would just remind you that your views are broadly shared, and that many would claim some sort of victory if that approach was taken in pt 3.

Yeah, my predictions for Batman 3 have always been... (and shared by many...)....

1. Joker will be "felt", not seen/not heard
2. Catwoman is a certainty
3. Bruce will be the focus of B3 again, much like BB, less like TDK.

 

[BLACK-SPIDEY]

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheJokerBlogs

 

[Ledlunar]

Sure. I didn't intend to be rude there; I thought I would just remind you that your views are broadly shared, and that many would claim some sort of victory if that approach was taken in pt 3.

wow that rings very true the whole Batman 3 Joker debate seems more like fans want to prove one another wrong to feel as if they on the same ball as Nolan, I personally agree it would be cheap to have some actor sit in shadows and use a left over Heath laugh from a Arkham cell... really cheap and annoying, Id rather them use the boogie man approach you mentioned to that.... Id want a recast most of all... I was more than happy and amazed with what Heath did... BUT maybe another actor could capture a bit of that same magic and channel some Ledger back to life in the character he created..... I guess Im kindof waiting to see how 3 other talented actors tackle filling Ledgers shoes on The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus ... I mean if they all seem off in that film.... I will quit blowing my horn about them continuing to carry out the Jokers story and recasting, and completely agree with the take above.... just referring to him.... or using him as a "boogie man"

 

[namtaB]

Yeah, my predictions for Batman 3 have always been... (and shared by many...)....

1. Joker will be "felt", not seen/not heard
2. Catwoman is a certainty
3. Bruce will be the focus of B3 again, much like BB, less like TDK.

I don't think Joker's presence will be felt at all in B3. The same way Ra's and the League wasn't felt at all in TDK, not even a mention. And Scarecrow was quickly dealt with in 2 minutes. Watching Gotham in TDK you would never had guessed it was subjected to a massive chemical attack just a few months prior. Gotham City seems to recover very quickly from catastrophic events. Even Ra's attack didn't highten the City's awareness one bit since people on the street were casually walking around when a schoolbus crashed into and drove out of a bank after a major robbery.

I think the whole "Joker will be felt" in B3 is some sort of fanboy fetish. His arc was complete in TDK, much like Ra's in BB. All the exposition of how Gotham deals with the aftermath of the Joker won't be covered by the film for the simple reason that it detracts from the next stage of the story and their respective villains. The two films so far are remarkebly self contained with very little carryover. I expect the same trend to continue in Batman 3.

 

[Ledlunar]

I don't think Joker's presence will be felt at all in B3. The same way Ra's and the League wasn't felt at all in TDK, not even a mention. And Scarecrow was quickly dealt with in 2 minutes. Watching Gotham in TDK you would never had guessed it was subjected to a massive chemical attack just a few months prior. Gotham City seems to recover very quickly from catastrophic events. Even Ra's attack didn't highten the City's awareness one bit since people on the street were casually walking around when a schoolbus crashed into and drove out of a bank after a major robbery.

I think the whole "Joker will be felt" in B3 is some sort of fanboy fetish. His arc was complete in TDK, much like Ra's in BB. All the exposition of how Gotham deals with the aftermath of the Joker won't be covered by the film for the simple reason that it detracts from the next stage of the story and their respective villains. The two films so far are remarkebly self contained with very little carryover. I expect the same trend to continue in Batman 3.

haha it is a fanboy fetish Im sure, but cmon the Joker is the top dog in Batmans Rogues gallery.... even Batman on the run being wanted is a bit of the Joker being felt... , Batman & Gordon (and every one who saw TDK) know it was joker who started this whole problem that will carry over to the third film... my fan boy fetish I suppose is having a Superhero film franchise that has villains carry over to other films instead of opting for the old Bat franchise routine of new villains every film

 

[CaptainClown]

I don't think Joker's presence will be felt at all in B3. The same way Ra's and the League wasn't felt at all in TDK, not even a mention. And Scarecrow was quickly dealt with in 2 minutes. Watching Gotham in TDK you would never had guessed it was subjected to a massive chemical attack just a few months prior. Gotham City seems to recover very quickly from catastrophic events. Even Ra's attack didn't highten the City's awareness one bit since people on the street were casually walking around when a schoolbus crashed into and drove out of a bank after a major robbery.

I think the whole "Joker will be felt" in B3 is some sort of fanboy fetish. His arc was complete in TDK, much like Ra's in BB. All the exposition of how Gotham deals with the aftermath of the Joker won't be covered by the film for the simple reason that it detracts from the next stage of the story and their respective villains. The two films so far are remarkebly self contained with very little carryover. I expect the same trend to continue in Batman 3.

Rah's/Scarecrows presence was felt most during the damn virals where they addressed the random outbreaks of fear gas and what to do when you come in contact with it. That was one bit that I really liked that was just basically pushed aside with TDK, still good though.

 

[Ledlunar]

also even the dude who JOker had with him at the funeral for Loeb was kindof a weird way of saying Ra's is still felt he freed all those Arkham inmates who Im sure made it easier for Joker to use and execute his plans (presuming some more of his thugs were looneys) even scarecrow was a result of Ra's and now he's dealing the fear toxin on a street level....

 

[GregComicFan]

I don't think Joker's presence will be felt at all in B3. The same way Ra's and the League wasn't felt at all in TDK, not even a mention. And Scarecrow was quickly dealt with in 2 minutes. Watching Gotham in TDK you would never had guessed it was subjected to a massive chemical attack just a few months prior. Gotham City seems to recover very quickly from catastrophic events. Even Ra's attack didn't highten the City's awareness one bit since people on the street were casually walking around when a schoolbus crashed into and drove out of a bank after a major robbery.

I think the whole "Joker will be felt" in B3 is some sort of fanboy fetish. His arc was complete in TDK, much like Ra's in BB. All the exposition of how Gotham deals with the aftermath of the Joker won't be covered by the film for the simple reason that it detracts from the next stage of the story and their respective villains. The two films so far are remarkebly self contained with very little carryover. I expect the same trend to continue in Batman 3.

You could be right and I think your opinion makes a lot of sense.

But...

I think it will be impossible for the Joker to NOT be "felt" since he 1) killed Rachel Dawes 2) made Dent go insane which in turn caused Batman to take the fall which in turn caused Batman to be framed for murder 3) He's still alive.... all these things are elements Ras Al Ghul DID NOT share, thus why in TDK he wasn't mentioned. He didn't kill anybody important. He didn't hurt Batman personally or cause Gotham's "white knight" to fall from grace. Ras Al Ghul was, in Nolan's world, kinda like a stepping stone. Batman defeated him and thus he established himself as a hero of Gotham. Joker, on the other hand, tore everybody down and left everybody in the dumps. With Ras, Batman could just say "Hey hey! I saved the day! go me go!" But.... with the Joker everybody was left conflicted (Fox, Alfred, Batman, Gordon, and Dent)

 

[regwec]

The only scenario in which The Joker would be irrelevant would occur many years after the events of TDK, I think.

 

[Ledlunar]

So do you think they should bring him back in the next film before he would become irrelevent?

honestly IF Nolan does 3 films Id want him to be the one to bring him back rather then a new director in the 4th film bring him back... if Nolan did 4 films (which I doubt [now anyways]) I would'nt mind him sitting out one film and be refernced in the 3rd film... and having Nolan bring him back in 4

but I do think I would like to see more of him... shame it couldn't be Ledger again though he WAS fanastic