The Dark Knight The Dark Knight...a stand-alone???

[IAmTheKnight]

This is something that has been getting to me. I've seen numerous people say that TDK could stand on its own, that it doesn't necessarily need a sequel, even that the it was a glorious ending.

I'm just curious: where the heck does this come from?

In the movie I saw, Batman is now on the run, has the deaths of not only criminals, but cops on his hands, the city has just gone through a major crisis with no apparent light in sight, Lucius Fox's employment is up in the air (the small smile at the destruction of the sonar device gives me question), and the freakin' Bat-signal is destroyed! How is this any kind of ending? It is a glorious cliff-hanger, but as an ending it is entirely unsatisfying. I would say it would even be closer to an ending if he didn't have the reputation as a cop killer, and there was some apparent possibility of things getting at least some semblance of a rebuilding, but if you leave it here, it's not just "things getting worse before they get better," it's pretty much dumping on everything that was set-up in Begins. It's taken Batman (and Gotham) to one of the most dire positions he's ever been in in the mythos.

And people are actually saying they would be satisfied with this as an ending?

Why?

 

[hatebox]

Because it demonstrates why Batman is truly heroic - the act itself carries greater significance than what happens to him after.

And yes, I want a sequel badly.

 

[Jonathan Crane]

And people are actually saying they would be satisfied with this as an ending?

I'm satisfied. I think TDK has some serious flaws, but it's a very good movie that doesn't need a sequel.

Besides, I think Nolan can't make better movie. At least not in PG-13 world without blood and real violence and dark.

 

[Boom]

And people are actually saying they would be satisfied with this as an ending?

Yes.

Why?

Because, as someone said earlier, it shows heroism through sacrifice.

 

[IAmTheKnight]

Sure it shows heroism through sacrifice. What does that have to with it being a satisfying final ending? Nothing.

Not only is it not satisfying from a story and character perspective, but thematically there is plenty to be explored as a result of the events of TDK.

 

[Seditionary]

Theres plenty to be explored at the end of pretty much every batman story...It never ends. Thats the point..with begins you get the escalation speech, in the dark knight you get batman on the run from the cops with his already corroding image destroyed to everyone but gordon and his family, alfred, and even the joker.

And talk about being satisfied by an ending...HE RIDES HIS MOTORCYCLE INTO A LIGHT. This is ****ing right out of a cowboy ending into a sunset. SAME THING

 

[hatebox]

Sure it shows heroism through sacrifice. What does that have to with it being a satisfying final ending? Nothing.

Not only is it not satisfying from a story and character perspective, but thematically there is plenty to be explored as a result of the events of TDK.

(long sigh)

You seem to have missed the point big time, but even going by your rationale is it not a good thing that the film opened up new avenues to explore?

 

[Anita18]

And talk about being satisfied by an ending...HE RIDES HIS MOTORCYCLE INTO A LIGHT. This is ****ing right out of a cowboy ending into a sunset. SAME THING

Except faster.

Theres plenty to be explored at the end of pretty much every batman story...It never ends. Thats the point..with begins you get the escalation speech, in the dark knight you get batman on the run from the cops with his already corroding image destroyed to everyone but gordon and his family, alfred, and even the joker.

TDK kind of is a stand-alone, if you consider it possible that Bruce can simply walk away from the Batman persona after the sacrifice, and forever stay the bad guy. Of course we, as Batman fans, know he won't, but we don't see Batman in the "future" timeline, only Gordon. The film suggests that it's a possibility.

But as Seditionary suggested, just as in BB, the story opens up new possibilities because Batman's quest is never-ending. BB concluded with the fact that Batman, having been tested with his first acute city-wide threat, has come into his own. And TDK concluded with the idea of how far Batman's altruism truly goes.

 

[Pauluz]

The ending is one of many things that made TDK a great movie.

 

[Anjow1060]

I'm one that doesn't agree with that statement.

I feel like too much was left open and too much was left out.

IMO, this is like one of those movies shot back to back without the back to back actually being done.

Sure, there's "some" character "growth". Lord knows how we got there because I sure don't. We weren't with Bruce enough during all the mayhem to watch him going through changes IMO. So not only is the story/plot elements needing to be tied up, but I'd like the next film to be a lot slower, a little more reflective of what the hell happened in TDK.

This is not the "high note" that it should end on. Sure, he's not superman. It's not gonna be all sunshine and rainbows. But it's possible, that throughout all this hell he goes through on a constant basis, constantly losing (he did lose to Ras -damaged a majority of the city, lost to joker - because he didnt save dent, lost to two face because he became the villain for him.) Once......just once......I wanna see Batman win. Why? Because even tho his fight is never-ending, some glimmer of hope needs to be there to keep him going. Even if it's helping a gray area character who dresses like a cat (wink) find her moral high ground. Bruce knows he's lost himself forever, we got that in TDK. What we need to see, is that he becomes that hero Harvey was. That symbol for others. That he can inspire another person the way he did Dent, and for them not to fall.

....but thats just in my humble opinion.



- Jow

 

[hatebox]

Batman did win though, depending on your interpretation of the last scene. I took a lot of hope from the end.

Hell, the fact that I can use the word 'interpretation' to describe a batman movie sums it all up really. We've come a long way baby.

 

[November Rain]

it can and it can't

if you take batman begins and the dark knight as origin films, then it stands on its own. If you only consider begins as the origin, then it can't as some sort of balance is required from bruce.

 

[IAmTheKnight]

I agree with Anjow.

Yes, it's a good thing that there is plenty to explore--what I'm saying is that it seems like there are people who wouldn't mind that not being explored. Like we can just leave it at this and start over in ten, twenty years. I don't think so.

Riding into the sunset? Yeah, sure, with Dodge City having just gone through a meat grinder and the cowboy considered a deputy killer. That's a fine sunset to ride into.

Ever since Begins finished, what we've been hearing is that things get worse before they get better. Even in the film they said it. We've seen it get worse. I want to see things start to get better.

I don't want it to end this way. I want a sense of optimism, or at least hope. Yes, Bruce is stuck in this path now, but at least he'll know he's doing some good. It'll be a long, hard road ahead of him, but it will be worth it. Do we really have that feeling at the end of TDK? I don't think so.

It's a GREAT Act II finale, I don't deny that. It's outstanding. But a conclusion? Nah. No way.

 

[Mr. Earle]

I agree with Anjow.

Yes, it's a good thing that there is plenty to explore--what I'm saying is that it seems like there are people who wouldn't mind that not being explored. Like we can just leave it at this and start over in ten, twenty years. I don't think so.

Riding into the sunset? Yeah, sure, with Dodge City having just gone through a meat grinder and the cowboy considered a deputy killer. That's a fine sunset to ride into.

Ever since Begins finished, what we've been hearing is that things get worse before they get better. Even in the film they said it. We've seen it get worse. I want to see things start to get better.

I don't want it to end this way. I want a sense of optimism, or at least hope. Yes, Bruce is stuck in this path now, but at least he'll know he's doing some good. It'll be a long, hard road ahead of him, but it will be worth it. Do we really have that feeling at the end of TDK? I don't think so.

It's a GREAT Act II finale, I don't deny that. It's outstanding. But a conclusion? Nah. No way.

So why do you care if this movie can stand on its own or its part of a trilogy?

And i have to disagree with you, I think we got a conclusion. This movie showed us why batman is all kinds of badass, how he is that special kind of hero. How his sacrifice, is him not being the hero and standing there not getting his hands dirty. How batman redeems himself is another issue. We know he will redeem himself somehow. But its not important. The story is complete. The movie was about chaos and how different people respond to it, as well as batman's modus operandi. And the movie ended triumphantly with Batman lifting the world on his shoulders like a real hero. It was the best ending in a superhero movie ever (with Begins second)!

The next movie can go into lengths about how he redeemed himself. But we know he will eventually. Why are you whining? What is the point of this thread?

 

[kyuubijavi1]

TDK had a great sign of hope the whole boat scene was all about how Gotham was ready to believe in good. The people where ready too change Batman has done what he set out too do back in Batman Begins, change the minds of the citizins of Gotham and the ones that run the town. Sure you can say Batman appearing as a killer isnt good but Bat's isnt the type of hero that needs a good rep. Batman is a Dark Knight he's not going to ride around in a white horse and get cheered on, like Superman or Spiderman he's the type of guy you least want to see yet you know he's the only one that can save you. So TDK did end with a glim of hope Batman will forever protect the city, the mob died out, Joker was caught & Two Face was stopped. Sure Nolan can come back and make another movie but whats going too happen in it, Batman goes back to being the big hero he was at the start of TDK imo he's better off where he's at right now.

 

[Mr. Earle]

TDK had a great sign of hope the whole boat scene was all about how Gotham was ready to believe in good. The people where ready too change Batman has done what he set out too do back in Batman Begins, change the minds of the citizins of Gotham and the ones that run the town. Sure you can say Batman appearing as a killer isnt good but Bat's isnt the type of hero that needs a good rep. Batman is a Dark Knight he's not going to ride around in a white horse and get cheered on, like Superman or Spiderman he's the type of guy you least want to see yet you know he's the only one that can save you. So TDK did end with a glim of hope Batman will forever protect the city, the mob died out, Joker was caught & Two Face was stopped. Sure Nolan can come back and make another movie but whats going too happen in it, Batman goes back to being the big hero he was at the start of TDK imo he's better off where he's at right now.

I dont think that batman will ever be cheered by the public the way superman is. He will become what he set out to be. A terrible figure for the criminals, but a symbol of hope for the citizens of Gotham. He will still be surrounded by mystery, admiration, and perhaps a bit of fear, but the citizens will get to understand that he took the fall for them and that he is indeed a knight. And that is the most important role for him. He needs to be a symbol that others will follow. Its only unfortunate that he had to serve gotham by tainting his name, something Superman would never do. Perhaps that is another lesson for Gothamites and himself.

But Batman wont survive for long with the whole GPD, FBI, on his tail. Not only that, but he needs the help of the GPD to do his work best (getting first dibs on the crime scenes, sharing clues and evidence, etc).

 

[IAmTheKnight]

*sigh*

I keep hearing the same stuff: It shows how Batman's awesome, made a huge sacrifice, blah blah blah. I agree, it's a great example of character and plot development, but it is no indication at all of a conclusion.

Glimmer of hope? Perhaps in the sense that it's not shown that the city is absolutely destroyed--a glimmer of hope in the sense that this isn't over. The ferry scene is an element of hope in the context of the film, and something to give a positive indication in a story element, but it's certainly not a fulfillment of what Bruce set out to do in Begins. It was not an example of the people standing up and resolving that they're going to do the right thing, take responsibility, and fix things for themselves. It was example of the good that everyday people are capable of.

Batman was not loved at the end of Begins/start of TDK. Yes, there was a small group of vigilantes who were inspired by him. But even in Begins there's always signs of that mixed reaction from the public, and he's not trusted by the police force. They're not exactly throwing any parades for him--AND I DON'T EXPECT THEM TO. Why does it seem like so many think that those who find it to not be stand-alone and conclusive think that Batman has to be loved?

My point is that the city has just gone through a major crisis and is not back on its feet. Batman is not just distrusted as a vigilante, not just as a murderer of criminals but as a FREAKIN' COP KILLER! What is not registering about that? This is new territory, and to place it at the end of the film does not exactly scream "The End" to me. There is now a major power vacuum in the crime world, and it seems like since Begins they've been building up to the rise of the freaks--escalation, Joker's comments, it all points that way.

So, yeah, we've had a major crisis, the city's unstable, Batman's hunted for the deaths of criminals and cops, and all signs point to a bunch of crazies trying to take over Gotham. Yeah, that's good, we'll leave it here.

Uh, no thanks.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

I agree with Seditionary. The war between Good and Evil is endless. The chaos (shown in the Joker), will always be present... along with the order (Batman). In one form or another. We're working with two symbols here, and I think that's the entire point of this version of Batman. There is no bringing Gotham back. But also... evil can never truly steal Gotham completely away from the good people.

That's why all great Batman films have open endings that can leave us to ponder the future.

 

[hatebox]

*sigh*

I keep hearing the same stuff: It shows how Batman's awesome, made a huge sacrifice, blah blah blah. I agree, it's a great example of character and plot development, but it is no indication at all of a conclusion.

It never ends though! From the sounds of it no conclusion would be good enough for you.

And since there's bound to be a sequel why are people complaining about it anyway?

 

[Mr. Earle]

It never ends though! From the sounds of it no conclusion would be good enough for you.

And since there's bound to be a sequel why are people complaining about it anyway?

Because three years until the next one is a long time!

 

[BatJeff7786]

I'm satisfied. I think TDK has some serious flaws, but it's a very good movie that doesn't need a sequel.

Besides, I think Nolan can't make better movie. At least not in PG-13 world without blood and real violence and dark.

:facepalm

 

[IAmTheKnight]

It never ends though! From the sounds of it no conclusion would be good enough for you.

And since there's bound to be a sequel why are people complaining about it anyway?

That's silly; of course there would be a conclusion good enough for me. Batman Begins had a great conclusion. If it wasn't only the first movie, and I knew for a fact that there weren't going to be any sequels, I would be okay with that ending. Sure, the fan in me would want to see more of the mythos explored, but that kind of ending is terrific.

As far as complaining...well, I wasn't trying to complain so much as trying to figure out where the heck people are getting a satisfactory conclusion from a cliffhanger.

The biggest reason I am dissatisfied with it as a conclusion is that it would've been okay to maybe have Batman saddled with the death of a criminal, and just leave it with the impression of "Okay, here we go, for better or worse." But they took it a step further: Batman is now going to be labelled a cop-killer. And to me, that needs to be dealt with. When you add to that all the other elements that are still screaming for on-screen fulfillment, and it seems like a grade-A cliffhanger to me.

I'm not stupid; I know that Batman's quest is ongoing. But I don't want that impression to be left via a down ending. And let's not forget, Bruce wasn't trying to wipe out all crime everywhere, that's an issue that's bigger than even Batman, and he knows that. He was trying to help bring his city to a place where it's at least a tolerable place that a human being can have a family and a decent life. Crime can happen in the nicest places just because humans are messed up. But that doesn't mean Gotham City has to be a hellhole. That's what Bruce was trying to change. And now with the crisis that occured in TDK, he's been knocked back in his mission, and he has a new set of challenges that, I think, deserve to be portrayed on the screen, and with the same top-notch cast and crew that got us to this point.

 

[Judson Caspian]

As much as I want a sequel, the ending of The Dark Knight really felt like a conclusion. The way Gordon was narrated combined with Batman running away, and Lucius walking away from the sonar screens.