The Dark Knight Rises The Official "What Do YOU Want in the Sequel?" Thread

[IAmTheKnight]

Overall, I love Nolan's Batfilms thus far, but there are a couple of issues that are picking at me:

1. Batman is not supposed to be in a contest with Superman for who can cause the most collateral damage. It was fine in Begins, when he was raw, emotional, and Alfred addressed it, but he goes on to blow up cars and crash into crap with no readily apparent necessity, and I'm thinking "Dude...wasn't this dealt with in the last movie?" I'm not sure why they went with all that in TDK, but hopefully that trend will not continue with 3.

2. Please, please, please...for crying out loud...NO CONTROVERSIAL DEATH IN PART 3! In Begins we had Ra's, in TDK we had Harvey. Why does it seem that Batman, for all the talk of his limits, ends up skirting the issue in the end of the film? Yes, there were true threats, but having the line is meaningless if you consistently find ways to blur it or cross it. The Joker/Batpod wipeout scene makes this all the more clear--Joker was an out-and-out psycho who does this crap for fun, and with no repentance, and yet Ra's and Harvey have to be taken down? It wouldn't be as big of an issue for me if they'd simply address it, but there is no remorse or guilt at the death of Ra's, and he seems grim but unsaddened at the fact that, intentional or not, he just killed Harvey/Two-Face. I truly hope this is addressed at least to some degree in the third film.

The biggest non-ethical/intellectual issue for me is this: I want us to finally see the payoff for the "improvements to the southeast wing" line from Begins.

Comments on these? Or any other issues/concerns?

 

[Ronny Shade]

I've said it before:

BB: Fear
TDK: Madness
3: Power

I want to see Batman struggling with "big picture" solutions.

 

[DeGenerate10]

I'd like to see some mention of his parents. It was their death that made him Batman afterall.

 

[kid dropper]

Overall, I love Nolan's Batfilms thus far, but there are a couple of issues that are picking at me:

1. Batman is not supposed to be in a contest with Superman for who can cause the most collateral damage. It was fine in Begins, when he was raw, emotional, and Alfred addressed it, but he goes on to blow up cars and crash into crap with no readily apparent necessity, and I'm thinking "Dude...wasn't this dealt with in the last movie?" I'm not sure why they went with all that in TDK, but hopefully that trend will not continue with 3.

2. Please, please, please...for crying out loud...NO CONTROVERSIAL DEATH IN PART 3! In Begins we had Ra's, in TDK we had Harvey. Why does it seem that Batman, for all the talk of his limits, ends up skirting the issue in the end of the film? Yes, there were true threats, but having the line is meaningless if you consistently find ways to blur it or cross it. The Joker/Batpod wipeout scene makes this all the more clear--Joker was an out-and-out psycho who does this crap for fun, and with no repentance, and yet Ra's and Harvey have to be taken down? It wouldn't be as big of an issue for me if they'd simply address it, but there is no remorse or guilt at the death of Ra's, and he seems grim but unsaddened at the fact that, intentional or not, he just killed Harvey/Two-Face. I truly hope this is addressed at least to some degree in the third film.

The biggest non-ethical/intellectual issue for me is this: I want us to finally see the payoff for the "improvements to the southeast wing" line from Begins.

Comments on these? Or any other issues/concerns?

Man, i am so behind you on number two, seriously, if he could take the trouble to send a zipline after the joker, he could have saved ra's, he couldve disarmed harvey, we saw him disarm so many career thugs and ninjas. but its like, no it serves the plot better so lets pretend these are situations where he has no other choice. I mean seriously though, ra's cuffed and sent to central booking, it really wouldnt work i guess, and harvey's death serves some major thematic and dramatic purposes. But still ive noticed that too, they make this whole big deal how he never kills but then he does. One way to look at is that they got themselves killed trying to kill others, and batman merely neglected to save them, but that sounds like some dirty cop **** to me......

 

[Bubastis]

Deaths ftw.

Well that came out kinda morbid, but the point stands. Without death it's hard to have conflict and without conflict we don't have any DRAMA.

 

[kid dropper]

true

 

[WeaponXProject]

2. Please, please, please...for crying out loud...NO CONTROVERSIAL DEATH IN PART 3! In Begins we had Ra's, in TDK we had Harvey. Why does it seem that Batman, for all the talk of his limits, ends up skirting the issue in the end of the film? Yes, there were true threats, but having the line is meaningless if you consistently find ways to blur it or cross it. The Joker/Batpod wipeout scene makes this all the more clear--Joker was an out-and-out psycho who does this crap for fun, and with no repentance, and yet Ra's and Harvey have to be taken down? It wouldn't be as big of an issue for me if they'd simply address it, but there is no remorse or guilt at the death of Ra's, and he seems grim but unsaddened at the fact that, intentional or not, he just killed Harvey/Two-Face. I truly hope this is addressed at least to some degree in the third film.

I agree, don't kill big name characters. I could see Rachel's coming but I don't think it is necessary for their to be villain deaths. It worked fine with Joker and it could help build up to Arkham Asylum.


Also, build Wayne Manor again.

Introduce Batman's deep disillusionment. Believeing these villains only exist because he exists.

Perhaps, have Batman show fear again. Fear of power. How can he stop all the villains?

 

[IAmTheKnight]

I'd like to see some mention of his parents. It was their death that made him Batman afterall.

Ah, I knew there was one I wanted to mention but forgot: yes, I want a visit to his parents' grave. That's a major element that took a backseat in TDK, and while he did gain some amount of control over that element in Begins, I think there's room for it to an extent that wasn't reached in TDK (did they even really mention his parents?).

Deaths ftw.

Well that came out kinda morbid, but the point stands. Without death it's hard to have conflict and without conflict we don't have any DRAMA.

Batman-induced death? No thanks. And really? It's that hard to have conflict without death? It gets done all the time. It's an insult to the tremendous talent involved in these films to just say "We need it for the drama."

Again, I wouldn't even necessarily mind what's happened as much if they didn't just blow it off. I'm still hoping against hope that they will address this issue, but at the same time, I'm not holding my breath.

EDIT: Oh, and kid_dropper's comment about disarming Harvey reminded me of something else: We need to see some freakin' batarang action, baby. Yeah.

 

[Cancer4TheCure]

I agree with pretty much everything that has been said so far. Some things from me:

1. I want to feel more continuity. This is a very minor gripe, but while I felt Begins and Knight were definitely in the same series I didn't feel like they were two parts of one story. I understand the films are about two different ideas (fear and madness respectively), but I would have liked a throwback to Begins. Even just one line can make the two films feel connected.

2. I cannot stress this enough: No. Love. Interest. I know a lot of people on these boards want Catwoman in the next film, but I don't. Rachel has just died and Bruce is in mourning. Do not ruin what can be a very important arc to the character by having him fall in love with the next thing that walks. If that happens, I will be very upset.

That's all for now, haha.

 

[kid dropper]

what about the line " with carmine falcone locked away in arkham", or "didnt you recognize your baby pancaking cop cars on the evening news",

 

[Cancer4TheCure]

Reese's Revenge.

 

[IAmTheKnight]

2. I cannot stress this enough: No. Love. Interest. I know a lot of people on these boards want Catwoman in the next film, but I don't. Rachel has just died and Bruce is in mourning. Do not ruin what can be a very important arc to the character by having him fall in love with the next thing that walks. If that happens, I will be very upset.

I see your point, but it partly depends on how long after TDK the next one takes place. The thought I have is that it wouldn't really be a true love like with Rachel, but she's more like a temptation--Bruce would be pretty broken down at this story, and it would be taking all he has in him just to hang on. Catwoman would be the dark side pulling at him to reject his mission.

You do raise a valid issue with the Catwoman idea, though. It would have to be handled just right to really work.

 

[DeGenerate10]

Reese's Revenge.

Bruce saved Reese's life though. What's he need revenge for?

 

[protoctista]

I NEED to see:


1) Wayne Manor still under construction. It would be ridiculous for Batman to move back into Wayne Manor, it having burned to the ground, and for there not to be some suggestion of it being a totally new building. People move back into houses whilst the finishing touches are still being added, so just something as simple as scaffolding and builders plus a few charred corner stones would be adequate. If I see Wayne Manor exactly as it was in Batman Begins, it will make a total mockery of the line "rebuild it. Exactly as it was".


2) related to the above, but I NEED to see some explanation of how the batcave got built without anyone noticing that it was our hero's lair. This is particularly important considering the events set in motion by the last act of TDK. An idea I had was Wayne throwing a house-warming party (gettit? gettit? house warming! gettit?) and having large crates get smuggled in under the guise of party supplies when in fact it is for the batcave. But there's still the monumental 'EH?' that would be raised if the batcave has got arcitechtural elements like structural supports, concrete and raising/lowering platforms; because these require heavy machinery and a construction crew, which isn't exactly sly if you want to keep the identity and whereabouts of your alter ego secret.


3) Batman has to mourn Rachel's death. It's slightly silly that he didn't probe himself morally over his responsibility with regards to Ra's Al Ghul - the line "I don't have to save you" seeming a little contradictory to his behaviour towards the Joker, but I can live with that. However if he does not mourn, deeply, the death of his childhood friend and 'hope for a normal life' then it will completely remove any dramatic purpose the death had.


4) Also, related to the above, Bruce HAS to be in moral turmoil over his actions at the end of TDK, because we've all been a been confused about his little fall, so he should be too. Even if it's just a small scene where he's sat in deep contemplation and then says to Alfred something like, "I didn't think it was that far a drop" and Alfred says "It was him or the boy. It wasn't your fault, it was just chance" or something like that (bad place, I'm not a writer). Then we can leave the issue to rest and move on.

5) And Reese. For any Batman enemy, in fact anyone at all interested in Batman's identity (FBI, CIA, Gotham Police, the mob, the media, whichever supervillain they have, Catwoman...) is going to go STRAIGHT to Reese after his near public announcement of Batman's identity. Either he goes into convincing protective custordy by Batman himself - GPD can hardly give him protective custordy as they want his information... or he gets killed off... or tortured... or something. Deal with the little ****.






I do want to see Catwoman, because I love the character, but I admit its a difficult to act to pull off - if Bruce is all moody and rueful about Rachel's death, Harvey's death and all the rest of it, its gonna be hard to slip in getting turned on by the kinkiest bit of sex-on-legs since sex started walking and whipping.

 

[Cancer4TheCure]

I do want to see Catwoman, because I love the character, but I admit its a difficult to act to pull off - if Bruce is all moody and rueful about Rachel's death, Harvey's death and all the rest of it, its gonna be hard to slip in getting turned on by the kinkiest bit of sex-on-legs since sex started walking and whipping.

My thoughts exactly. Fantastic phrasing.

 

[Mach2Infinity]

I'd like to see Mr. Reese working for Bruce obviously knowing he's Batman. He seemed to be good with handling finances and conducting a little investigations of his own. Perhaps if they use Roman Sionis/Black Mask and Janus Cosmetics, he can be Bruce's tool, looking into dubious financing and so forth. It'll be an interesting dynamic.

I too would like to see a re-focus on Bruce's parents and of course a strong emphasis on the "why do we fall? So we learn to pick ourselves up" mantra. This is a key theme running through the series and it has added relevence in the third film. Batman must ultimately be redeemed, whether he seeks this or not (I suspect not), it'll be something that he gains but unexpectedly.

Waynor Manor and the Batcave is where Bruce and Batman truly belong, as another has said it would be better if there's still construction work going on. Obviously a lot of 'heavy gear transport' can be disguised with material deliveries. We also need to see what the improvements on the "south east corner" actually entail.

A radically new Batmobile is needed, not simply a re-modified Tumbler but a new vehicle. One that is sleeker than the Tumbler, yet still retains the more armoured concept. Perhaps a sloped armour design without separated plates, maybe one with steal technology, radar absorbing material and significantly reduced heat signature.

A Batboat is essential and I seem to remember Nathan Crowley, one of the designers stating he'd be keen to do so. This seems a logical step.

A modified suit, the first was armoured but bulky. The second was light, flexible but prone to being punctured. So a slightly more armoured one that is still light yet provides Batman with the right balance between mobility and armour without compromising either.

The Black Mask is an obvious choice for arch-villain. He can destroy or unify the remaining big criminal groupings in Gotham. Part of great 'purge' plan. He is a crazed individual after power. He wants to take over Gotham, both on legitimate and illegitmate side. Buying out businesses under the pretense of 'providing and sustaining jobs through economic hardship'. He'll be looking to take over from the power vacuum left by the Joker's actions. Perhaps Rupert Thorne is the last remaining 'mobster'? He should be played by Stellan Skarsgård. The idea that a freak can take over organised crime is one too tempting to pass over.

A possible love interest for Bruce and also Batman, maybe 'two' on the go? He has to choose which is sustainable.

 

[gwynplaine]

I don't want to have to wait another 20 years to see the Joker on the big screen again.

 

[protoctista]

I'd like to see Mr. Reese working for Bruce obviously knowing he's Batman. He seemed to be good with handling finances and conducting a little investigations of his own. Perhaps if they use Roman Sionis/Black Mask and Janus Cosmetics, he can be Bruce's tool, looking into dubious financing and so forth. It'll be an interesting dynamic.
I'd like to see Mr. Reese working for Bruce

We already have Lucius Fox working for him. The more people know he's Batman and work for him, the less integrity he has with the whole "I'm willing to put my life on the line, but it has to my mine, no-one else's". Batman should ultimately endeavour to work alone, his agenda is about putting the hardship onto one pair of shoulders so that others don't bear the burden.

Also, Reese doesn't have the cheeky charisma of Morgan Freeman's Lucius Fox. He served a role in TDK, but that doesn't mean he should be a regular installment.

Kill him.

A radically new Batmobile is needed, not simply a re-modified Tumbler but a new vehicle.

I think that's why Nolan destroyed the Tumbler, to set up a more traditional batmobile. Even in TDK, Nolan's batman continues to take steps towards establishing his position within the comics - a third film should continue that (Moving back into Wayne Manor too)

I imagine a cross between a lamborghini and the tumbler. If I was Bruce Wayne I'd be looking at my lamborghini and picturing the addition of the tumbler's rear rocket booster...
*Hopes someone does a manip*

A Batboat is essential

A little bit strong. Sure if it suits the story and the design is cool... but essential?

A modified suit, the first was armoured but bulky. The second was light, flexible but prone to being punctured. So a slightly more armoured one that is still light yet provides Batman with the right balance between mobility and armour without compromising either.

Makes sense.

A possible love interest for Bruce and also Batman, maybe 'two' on the go? He has to choose which is sustainable.

As if Rachel's death wasn't enough heartbreak... this wouldn't make thematic sense at all.

 

[kyuubijavi1]

eh about the Harvey thing

Batman just came back from dealing with who knows how many swat teams, a bunch of Jokers men, then got a beating, bittin and stabed by the Joker and his dogs and finally when he goes to harvey what happens he gets shot.

Batman had no time to get up and think of a way to stop him, the only option left is tackle the guy before he kills Gordan's kid.

That scenerio could be played out 10 different ways each ending with Batman chosing the kid's life over harvey's plus it was a 3 stroy drop at most, Batman did not have enough time to pull up the kid then shot a zip line to catch Harvey before he hit the ground.

 

[Ronny Shade]

I love the ambiguity of the deaths.

Perfect for "maybes" of future installments.

 

[IAmTheKnight]

3) Batman has to mourn Rachel's death. It's slightly silly that he didn't probe himself morally over his responsibility with regards to Ra's Al Ghul - the line "I don't have to save you" seeming a little contradictory to his behaviour towards the Joker, but I can live with that. However if he does not mourn, deeply, the death of his childhood friend and 'hope for a normal life' then it will completely remove any dramatic purpose the death had.


4) Also, related to the above, Bruce HAS to be in moral turmoil over his actions at the end of TDK, because we've all been a been confused about his little fall, so he should be too. Even if it's just a small scene where he's sat in deep contemplation and then says to Alfred something like, "I didn't think it was that far a drop" and Alfred says "It was him or the boy. It wasn't your fault, it was just chance" or something like that (bad place, I'm not a writer). Then we can leave the issue to rest and move on.

Yes, yes. Number 3 isn't AS imperative, as it was clear he'd been in his penthouse stewing for a while when Alfred comes in, but it would still be good to really have him let it out. And number 4--100%.

Something else that occurred to me: I want to see Batman just saving everyday people from everyday crime. I want to see him break up a mugging or something--in all the awesomeness with which he does such things.

 

[Ronny Shade]

Something else that occurred to me: I want to see Batman just saving everyday people from everyday crime. I want to see him break up a mugging or something--in all the awesomeness with which he does such things.

I don't. One of the things I love about this franchise is that its actually believable that Batman does what he does. No way would he be able to be there for every mugging in the streets. He would however be able to track and break up drug deals and mob hits...things that are planned out. And that's what he does.

 

[protoctista]

One of the things I love about this franchise is that its actually believable that Batman does what he does. No way would he be able to be there for every mugging in the streets. He would however be able to track and break up drug deals and mob hits...things that are planned out. And that's what he does.

Yeah I definately think his agenda centres around the bigger fish. I can imagine he spends most of his time gathering information on big drug-dealers/smugglers before making a planned hit. I'd like to see though, at the beginning, a 'project' that he's working on to show he operates in this manner - that'd be cool.

 

[Ronny Shade]

I want to see Batman portrayed as just a regular guy who goes to your house and beats the **** out of you if you get acquited of something you obviously did.

But thats a different batman for a different franchise.

 

[Juha]

I think one thing has already become painfully obvious. Nolan and Goyer can't handle any kind of chemistry between male and female characters. There's zero excitement in that department. No sexual tension, no sparkling of any kind. The relationship between Rachel and Bruce in the first movie was "meh" at best. The love triangle between Harvey, Bruce and Rachel was even worse. I mean Eckhart and Gyllenhaal had nothing going on and I also wasn't feeling Bruce's emotions towards Rachel. The kiss they shared...nothing, I tell you! Absolutely nothing.

I think this aspect may prove to be problematic if they decide to introduce Catwoman. We all know how amazing and electrifying the relationship between Batman/Bruce and Catwoman/Selina is suppose to be.