The Dark Knight TDK Casting Sides

[Rory gets laid]

Natascha came with the character that we all think is Bruce to go to dinner with Gannon and another woman so I don't think Natascha is Rachel although that would make complete and total sense.....but I love the way you're thinking Rory!

Right...I keep forgetting that my version of the sides is missing certain scenes! But honestly, I'm just suggesting that we leave what we think we know at the door, and speculate from outside the box.

Multiple names for the main characters seems like just the sort of thing Nolan & co. would do to throw us off, as I said, in the event the sides did get leaked...I mean, if they have a pseudonym for the film itself to detract curiousity (which I know is common for big-budget flicks that benefit from minimal distraction), who's to say the "ninjas" didn't kick secrecy into high gear by throwing us for an even further loop?

Anyways, I'll admit that though my Batman history is a tad rusty (I actually haven't read TLH since I first bought it, and I've since passed it -- as well as many of my older issues -- down to younger relatives/fanboys in the making), I definitely DO recall Dent's wife being targeted somwhere along the line (hence, my suspicion that Berg = Dent)...can anyone refresh my memory?

 

[Miranda Fox]

I'm just suggesting that we leave what we think we know at the door, and speculate from outside the box.

Multiple names for the main characters seems like just the sort of thing Nolan & co. would do to throw us off, as I said, in the event the sides did get leaked...I mean, if they have a pseudonym for the film itself to detract curiousity (which I know is common for big-budget flicks that benefit from minimal distraction), who's to say the "ninjas" didn't kick secrecy into high gear by throwing us for an even further loop?

Anyways, I'll admit that though my Batman history is a tad rusty (I actually haven't read TLH since I first bought it), I definitely DO recall Dent's wife being targeted somwhere along the line (hence, my suspicion that Berg = Dent)...can anyone refresh my memory?

You are correct - although she wasn't really attacked directly. Their house was blown up in an attempt to kill Dent and Gilda ended up in the hospital.

So, yeah, you may be onto something here.

 

[Anjow1060]

well.....we're not exactly the Men In Black here.

I think Nolan and co. changed names and page numbers. But I highly doubt they changed the names once....and then again....and then again.

Hell if they were gonna do that, they prolly just wrote fake pages and we've been debating nothing for the past couple days. I think they changed it so the actors who go for the roles don't see the names "Joker" and "Dent" and "Batman".

I think that the film makers were afraid of the actors letting it loose what movie they were going for so we wouldn't find out.

I don't think they ever intended for us to find those pages nor fork up the small amounts of cash for them. But put a small "just in case" plan into action....well....just in case.

 

[itsthebatman]

Ah, I do think they've changed the names. Otherwise, there would be a lot of duplication of roles. It's all to throw us off the scent - if they weren't worried, they'd hardly have changed the names in the first place, would they?

 

[Rory gets laid]

well.....we're not exactly the Men In Black here.

I think Nolan and co. changed names and page numbers. But I highly doubt they changed the names once....and then again....and then again.

Hell if they were gonna do that, they prolly just wrote fake pages and we've been debating nothing for the past couple days. I think they changed it so the actors who go for the roles don't see the names "Joker" and "Dent" and "Batman".

I think that the film makers were afraid of the actors letting it loose what movie they were going for so we wouldn't find out.

I don't think they ever intended for us to find those pages nor fork up the small amounts of cash for them. But put a small "just in case" plan into action....well....just in case.

Call me crazy, but if I didn't want anyone to know what I was up to, I'd make it as difficult for them as possible...and I don't even know any ninjas!!

Only until someone can provide me with a concrete argument to my multiple-name theory, will I see things otherwise.

This includes you, Anjow (your last post doesn't count as concrete, obviously.)

 

[Agentsands77]

If the maniac running free (that Engel is reffering to) is in fact Mr. J, then doesn't that (not to mention the terrorized cop, who refers to his assailant's "smile") somewhat contradict the popular theory that the prisoner in the "Stephens" scene is Mr. J?

Only if the page numbers are correct, and it seems they're not. I imagine that scene is actually towards the end of the film.

 

[Agentsands77]

Call me crazy, but if I didn't want anyone to know what I was up to, I'd make it as difficult for them as possible...and I don't even know any ninjas!!

Only until someone can provide me with a concrete argument to my multiple-name theory, will I see things otherwise.

Well, the problem is, I think your theory might be plausible if it weren't for the fact that the name changing has been rather lazy. We still get the "Dent house" listed, among other things. It doesn't seem like there was a huge conspiracy to change everything around.

Furthermore, I think fans get the tendency to think there might be more conspiracy than there is. In fact, they often do that. We shouldn't be overthinking this, and since we have no real reason to believe that multiple names would be used, well, it just doesn't make sense.

It's kind of like Chuckles being Joker. Could it be? I guess, but Nolan and co. went to way much trouble to try and throw fanboys off if its not. Nolan and co. have much bigger and more important things to worry about than tricking internet fanboys about ideas like that. If it says the part is up for audition, I imagine it's actually up for audition.

 

[Agentsands77]

Berg's a cop. Dent isn't.

Quite right. And I do think that the Berg moment speaks more to the volumes of the chaos the Joker is going to cause - he's going to do terrible things and affect a whole lot of people's lives.

Furthermore, the idea of Dent doing that scene is really distasteful. It's not a Dent move, if you ask me, especially the way the character is painted in the few other scenes we have. It might be a Two-Face move, but Berg isn't talking anything like Two-Face.

 

[Rory gets laid]

Quite right. And I do think that the Berg moment speaks more to the volumes of the chaos the Joker is going to cause - he's going to do terrible things and affect a whole lot of people's lives.

Furthermore, the idea of Dent doing that scene is really distasteful. It's not a Dent move, if you ask me, especially the way the character is painted in the few other scenes we have. It might be a Two-Face move, but Berg isn't talking anything like Two-Face.

Well, I didn't mean Two-Face, per se...I merely wanted to highlight the significance to Dent's wife actually being targeted along the line in Batman lore combined, with (who may be) Dent, who's actions (if they were his) show signs of the faithlessness in Justice/wanting to take the law in his own hands as perhaps a sign of what we can expect later on as you-know-who...

But very good point about the Joker affecting everyone's lives, and this scene speaking volumes of the imminent chaos...if that's the point they're attempting to get across there, then I can totally see it...

As for my "crackpot theory/theories", I still say its entirely possible, one way or the other.

 

[Ryan227]

Rory, I think there maybe something to the idea that they changed names of characters I just don't think that one character is going to have 3 or 4 different names in each side...as much as we would like to think Nolan is super cunning, people can be inherently lazy and don't want to take the time to do that much work. Who knows though I could be completely wrong altogether.

 

[Rory gets laid]

Edit.

 

[Rory gets laid]

Rory, I think there maybe something to the idea that they changed names of characters I just don't think that one character is going to have 3 or 4 different names in each side...as much as we would like to think Nolan is super cunning, people can be inherently lazy and don't want to take the time to do that much work. Who knows though I could be completely wrong altogether.

All things considered, I appreciate you at least looking at things from a different perspective.

All I'm saying is that when you look at the sides from this perspective, a very specific idea of the film (though quite possibly the wrong one) is revealed...4 names would seem a little much, but 2 or 3? As inherently lazy as I often am, as a writer myself, I take pride in knowing that it wouldn't be so difficult to change something here and there to throw people off when it was all said and done...

For those who've read an actual script, you know as well as I do that if a character's identity is to be kept a mystery until a certain point, they are referred to say, by their tone of voice and/or O.S. (off-screen) anyways...whose to say whether or Nolan & co. aren't merely taking what they want kept secret a half-step further by throwing us off with multiple names?

I know its a radical concept...but its a realistic one, given the circumstances.

 

[Ryan227]

I'm with you, I think your ideas are very realistic and not being a writer I'm not one to say whether changing the names is easy or not. I think though that your ideas are very very valid and I CAN see where Nolan and co. would want to change the names of important characters as to throw off someone who may want to read for more then one part or so they don't know what they are reading for.

 

[The Only Woj]

has anyone taken into account the age range of Gordon's son and that effect on the timeline? in Begins he was maybe a few months old? here I'm guessing he's at least a couple years old, being able to talk the way he did. unless he has two kids and my knowledge of Gordon's family is lacking.

 

[Rory gets laid]

has anyone taken into account the age range of Gordon's son and that effect on the timeline? in Begins he was maybe a few months old? here I'm guessing he's at least a couple years old, being able to talk the way he did. unless he has two kids and my knowledge of Gordon's family is lacking.

Actually, Woj...I'm also confused a little by this. I was always under the impression that Gordon (at least in the comics) only had the one kid -- a son, James.

 

[Ryan227]

If that indeed was James, Gordon's son, then TDK will have to be at least 3 to 4 years later for James to hold the type of intelligent conversation he did. Most kids younger then 4 don't ask why questions so he should be at least there age wise.

 

[Katsuro]

It might be possible that not only do some characters have more than one name, but that some times one name refers to two seperate characters.

For example, the terrorized cop side has "Randolph" coming in and talking to the tied up prisoners. I have a feeling that's Gordon, not Dent. However, the talk show mentions that Randolph has been injured somehow, and my suspicion is that's Dent. So maybe Gannon is Dent, The Cheif is Gordon, and Randolph refers to both at one time or another. The Prosecutor is also Dent, i suspect.

Also, while the possibility of Chuckles being Joker is ever so slightly possible, I highly doubt anyone who has a side all to themselves is cover for someone else. For example, Natascha is not Rachel. They would not let out this bit of script if there was no point. Why let it out if there's no role in it to be auditioned for? What does Nolan have to gain? He's aprehensive as it is about letting details out, he's not gonna give out more than he has to.

At least with Chuckles there's still Grumpy to be auditioned for, and it's possible that not listing Chuckles as a part to be cast would give away it's someone important. We'd all obviously guess the Joker, and what was supposed to be a surprise in the film is now ruined over a year before it comes out.

But with the cop/thug and detective/fat thug scene, much isn't really ruined by knowing one of them's Bullock or something. I doubt they'd try to hide something like that, when they could just change the name like they did with "Wuertz"

 

[Ryan227]

^ Well said Katsuro.

 

[Rory gets laid]

It might be possible that not only do some characters have more than one name, but that some times one name refers to two seperate characters.

For example, the terrorized cop side has "Randolph" coming in and talking to the tied up prisoners. I have a feeling that's Gordon, not Dent. However, the talk show mentions that Randolph has been injured somehow, and my suspicion is that's Dent. So maybe Gannon is Dent, The Cheif is Gordon, and Randolph refers to both at one time or another. The Prosecutor is also Dent, i suspect.

Also, while the possibility of Chuckles being Joker is ever so slightly possible, I highly doubt anyone who has a side all to themselves is cover for someone else. For example, Natascha is not Rachel. They would not let out this bit of script if there was no point. Why let it out if there's no role in it to be auditioned for? What does Nolan have to gain? He's aprehensive as it is about letting details out, he's not gonna give out more than he has to.

At least with Chuckles there's still Grumpy to be auditioned for, and it's possible that not listing Chuckles as a part to be cast would give away it's someone important. We'd all obviously guess the Joker, and what was supposed to be a surprise in the film is now ruined over a year before it comes out.

But with the cop/thug and detective/fat thug scene, much isn't really ruined by knowing one of them's Bullock or something. I doubt they'd try to hide something like that, when they could just change the name like they did with "Wuertz"

Now we're speaking the same language!

 

[bosef982]

All things considered, I appreciate you at least looking at things from a different perspective.

All I'm saying is that when you look at the sides from this perspective, a very specific idea of the film (though quite possibly the wrong one) is revealed...4 names would seem a little much, but 2 or 3? As inherently lazy as I often am, as a writer myself, I take pride in knowing that it wouldn't be so difficult to change something here and there to throw people off when it was all said and done...

For those who've read an actual script, you know as well as I do that if a character's identity is to be kept a mystery until a certain point, they are referred to say, by their tone of voice and/or O.S. (off-screen) anyways...whose to say whether or Nolan & co. aren't merely taking what they want kept secret a half-step further by throwing us off with multiple names?

I know its a radical concept...but its a realistic one, given the circumstances.

I don't understand that there is even a debate about this. It's fairly obvious that its multiple names being used for multiple characters. That seems to make more sense. Someone said that the fact that the Slug Lines give away the names shows that they are all different people. Consider a few things:

1) first and foresmost, obviously changing the names has worked, hasn't it? because we're all discussing it in ad nausem detail.

2) Most screenwriting software -- Final Draft especially -- can easily replace a characters name but it is more difficult to change the Slug Line locations (i.e. DENT HOUSE - CONTINUOUS) b/c many softwares set up a macro on it.

3) these are being used by various talent scouts, etc....to me the situational context that we know seems to justify everything more than any names. We can reasonably deduce who the people are, save for a few, just using the situation they are in and our general knowledge of the comic books.

Some of you are just blowing this out of proportion. The first time I read these sides I realized that they were using multiple names for multiple characters. It wasn't even a thought in my mind. Why or how anyone can't just say...ahh, with multiple names, this all makes sense now...is beyond me.

 

[Agentsands77]

whose to say whether or Nolan & co. aren't merely taking what they want kept secret a half-step further by throwing us off with multiple names?

I know its a radical concept...but its a realistic one, given the circumstances.

Not really. Because Nolan and co. clearly weren't planning on these sides falling into our hands at all. The names were changed only to throw off those who were reading the parts, not to throw off internet fanboys. And to throw-off would be actors, they don't need to go into really complicated schemes.

If that indeed was James, Gordon's son, then TDK will have to be at least 3 to 4 years later for James to hold the type of intelligent conversation he did. Most kids younger then 4 don't ask why questions so he should be at least there age wise.

Either it's going to be a plot hole, or Gordon has another son that wasn't shown in BB. And, if you think about it, considering Gordon's supposed to have been around as long as he has, it's unlikely he'd only have a newborn at this point.

There's no way there are 3 or 4 years in between BB and TDK, because all this stuff is where the Joker's just getting started, and where Batman is starting to develop an initial backlash. If Batman had been around for four years, all these developments are coming way too late.

 

[Katsuro]

The biggest reason i think some characters might share names and vice versa, is that there are too many fake names. Gannon, Cheif, Randolph, and Prosecutor.

Now, I have no doubt in my mind that Prosecutor and Gannon could be the same person, as it's no difference than having Prisoner and Gentle Voice be the same. Prosecutor is just a description, not really a name. I guess the same applies to The Chief, but they seem to use Randolph in certain situations where if he was the Chief, Chief would make more sense.

I mean, it'd be wierd if the dinner scene had Gannon referred to as Prosecutor, but i see no reason why when Randolph helps the terrorized cop, they wouldn't call him The Chief if that's who he was, unless of course it's to trick us.

On the OTHER hand, maybe The Cheif isn't Gordon. Maybe Loeb is The Chief, and his son being named James is there to trick us. I mean, why wouldn't they change that? So maybe Gannon/Prosector is Dent, Randolph is Gordon (who's injured slightly), and The Chief is Loeb.

I'm really hoping that the scene with Engel and the Mayor has Joker calling in as the next caller, so it'd be kinda wierd to have Harvey already scarred in the hospital by then.

DAMNIT!! Who knows! This is all too confusing. I want a script review already!! Hell, the least LR can do is clear up the mysteries of the casting sides. I'd be content with just telling us what fake names stand for which characters.

 

[Katsuro]

There's no way there are 3 or 4 years in between BB and TDK, because all this stuff is where the Joker's just getting started, and where Batman is starting to develop an initial backlash. If Batman had been around for four years, all these developments are coming way too late.

You know, I was thinking... a lot of people suspect a time span between BB and TDK, but what if instead TDK just takes place over a long period of time?

This is supposed to be heavily influenced by The Long Halloween, right? TLH took place over a whole year. Maybe the movie starts out right after Begins, but by the end of the film a year or more has passed.

Batman and Gordon are supposed to get to become close friends with Harvey before the accident, aren't they? So it would make sense to give them some time, even if it's not necessarily screen time, to develop their friendship. It'd be kinda silly for Batman to get so worked up over the loss of Harvey if he'd only known him for a little while.

 

[Rory gets laid]

You know, I was thinking... a lot of people suspect a time span between BB and TDK, but what if instead TDK just takes place over a long period of time?

This is supposed to be heavily influenced by The Long Halloween, right? TLH took place over a whole year. Maybe the movie starts out right after Begins, but by the end of the film a year or more has passed.

Batman and Gordon are supposed to get to become close friends with Harvey before the accident, aren't they? So it would make sense to give them some time, even if it's not necessarily screen time, to develop their friendship. It'd be kinda silly for Batman to get so worked up over the loss of Harvey if he'd only known him for a little while.

Very good point.

 

[Agentsands77]

Now, I have no doubt in my mind that Prosecutor and Gannon could be the same person, as it's no difference than having Prisoner and Gentle Voice be the same. Prosecutor is just a description, not really a name. I guess the same applies to The Chief, but they seem to use Randolph in certain situations where if he was the Chief, Chief would make more sense.

Let's not overthink this. I don't think they specifically decided which name to use based on the concept - it was probably very quickly done, and if they were using both Randolph and the Chief, Randolph's as good a name to use.

I mean, it'd be wierd if the dinner scene had Gannon referred to as Prosecutor, but i see no reason why when Randolph helps the terrorized cop, they wouldn't call him The Chief if that's who he was, unless of course it's to trick us.

Unless they weren't thinking that hard.

On the OTHER hand, maybe The Cheif isn't Gordon. Maybe Loeb is The Chief, and his son being named James is there to trick us. I mean, why wouldn't they change that? So maybe Gannon/Prosector is Dent, Randolph is Gordon (who's injured slightly), and The Chief is Loeb.

Doubt it. Doesn't sound like Loeb.

And assuming Gordon's Randolph, it doesn't make sense for him not to be the chief. If someone's going to comment on his recovery, he has to be a big wig - not just a Lieutenant. It has to be the head honcho. So Randolph has to be a bigwig (which places him at either Dent or Gordon, but it seems easier to connect Randolph to Gordon than it does to Dent).

I'm really hoping that the scene with Engel and the Mayor has Joker calling in as the next caller, so it'd be kinda wierd to have Harvey already scarred in the hospital by then.

Well, we don't know what follows that scene, so we don't know where in the story it takes place. But I don't think it would be that odd to have Dent scarred by that point if the conversation takes place towards the later fourth of the film.