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

[The ?ion]

1) **If** there are plans for bringng back Ra's I want to find out that the french guy Ducard was not Ra's Al Ghul....and Ken Watanabe IS. And if this is the case I want a real good looking old school Talia by his side, Ubu...and rumor talk of the Lazurus Pit and Ra's being hundreds of years old.

Actually, I would have liked it if Watanabe was Ra's, if only for the fact that Ra's should be a more ethnic individual. But, I enjoyed watching Qui Gon Jinn try to take down the Batman. Not even a Jedi Knight can stand up to the Dark Knight.

2) I would like some mention of the Joker, even a bit of video footage from his cell wearing his clown makeup because he demands it....showing he's getting some pull around arkham.

That would be nice actually. It was obvious by the way that TDK ended, that Nolan had plans for the Joker. Unfortunately, the premature passing of Mr. Ledger has derailed that. Out of respect for his audacious portrayal of the infamous rogue, I doubt we will ever see the character in the final film. But some hint would be nice. I am sure there is some unused footage that could be spliced in a la Marlon Brandon in Superman.

3) The batcave in full form.

I like the current set up. It seems more engrossing than the idea of a guy housing a ton of crap in a cave under his mansion. I like the fact that he has multiple places that house his equipment. The cave for vehicle and suit storage. Wayne Enterprises for his super computer access etc.

4) A batmobile...that looks like a bad azz sports car complete with oldschool bat head hood cover. I'm thinking of a car posted 2 or so months ago on a disscusion thread on here.

This one I have to disagree with. It always seemed unrealistic to me that a guy in a slightly souped up sedan with unnecessary additions (they would slow down your vehicle in real life), would not be followed. The police or villains should easily be able to follow Batman back to his cave, because his vehicles are so flamboyant. The tumbler proved its ability to evade being followed because of its heavy duty all-terrain nature (e.g. roof top jumps, surviving huge falls etc.).

5) A bulked up Chris Bale.

He is already pretty huge . Batman is only around 210 pounds. Bale weighs around that much in the movie (maybe around 190 at the least).

6) A costume that combines more elements of the actual costume from the comics and less robo-bat. I want want a suit made from a special clothe. to paraphrase a quote on the hype ; it's not imppossile to create a clothe costume that looks fantastic "only the will and imagination/desire is lacking"

While Sandy Collara's fantastic short film (Batman Dead End) gave us Clark Bartram in an amazingly faithful representation of the comic suit, I can understand why every director has maintained the armored look.

Even in the comic books, Batman is heavily armored (lead lined cowl, kevlar/nomex weave vest, millitary grade armored combat boots, weighted tips in the cape for combat and defense purposes etc). The difference is, the comic books ignore these facts and still show a skin tight costume as if all Batman wore were spandex tights. It is sort of like how nobody properly illustrates that Spider-Man wears web shooters (because realistically speaking, they would show under his gloves). Batman wears armor, thus it makes sense that in the films, he looks armored. Considering he has faced edged weapons, been shot, tazered etc, it would seem ridiculous for him to survive if all he wore were some lame cloth costume. He kind of needs armor so that you don't lose the suspension of disbelief.


7) An Alfred that does not try to make snyde sarcastic remarks ala Frank Miller that imply he thinks Bruce is crazy (like the "crazy ex-boyfriend you have no idea" exchange)

I like a witty/snarky Alfred. Keeps him from being useless like many stay over characters in a supporting cast (e.g. Mary Jane became useless once she married Peter, Aunt May has been useless for decades etc.).

8) The voice from Batman Begins.

Care to explain?

9) a Batman now in more emotional control in the face of overwelming odds and insanity,the man in control of himself, no more over emotional crazy guy. He practically advertised who he is by his emotional actions! He must be more detatched, analytical, and collected. Let Bruce handle the heavier emotional moments and even then he should exercise control-this man is trained in focused. I want to see the guy from BEGINS.

Do you read Batman? Remember how he freaked out when Dick was shot by Alexander Luther? Remember how he tried to murder the joker when Jason Todd was crow barred upside the head? Batman/Bruce always freaks out when people he loves are in grave danger. He is only calm and detached when it comes to unknown civilians.

10) The Gotham City we saw in begins and less chitown.

You do know that Begins was filmed in Chicago, right?

11)Batman down on the street-level running down street thugs for info, swooping down on alley crimes. maybe even talking to a couple of prostitutes for someones whereabouts. One thing I like from the amazing Denny O'niel/ Neal Adams comics run is that Batman actually talked to people. he wasn't all dark, broody, solitary and tormented-he mixed it up with people. I'm thinking a little of this would be cool.

Didn't we see this in Begins. He talked to a child and even gave up a piece of his equipment so that the child could prove that Batman wasn't an urban legend. Also, we see this right from jump in TDK when he takes down those drug runners in the parking garage.

12) Batarangs

He has consistently used them, though they are more throwing star like and less boomerang like.

13) Bruce in his suit sans cowl working in a crime lab complete with beakers, chemicals etc.

That would be nice. We have seen him doing crime analysis in his various hideouts (e.g. the bullet test scene in TDK), but he has yet to do it while in his suit, with the cowl off, as we often see in the comics.


14) Batman pulling up to Arkhams gravel road in that bad azz car as we hear the crunching stones, stepping out and walking toward the gate to meet Gordon.

Well, that won't happen now that he is a fugitive. But it would be nice.

15) A Bruce Wayne gravyard scene visiting the grave of his parents.

That is a must. Heck, even a scene of him visiting Crime Alley. That is something that I still like about Tim Burton's Batman. He really understood the importance of that relationship, as conveyed by the scene where Vicky photographs Bruce visiting Crime Alley.

16) A great mystery/detective story as the backbone to some kick ass action.

That would be nice. They do have some minor mysteries (e.g. trying to figure out who was killing city officials, and which official will be next), but they are never on such a grand scale as say, trying to figure out who the Calendar killer is, in the Long Halloween.

My reply...

 

[J. Custer]

My reply...

Reply to what?


I like the current set up. It seems more engrossing than the idea of a guy housing a ton of crap in a cave under his mansion. I like the fact that he has multiple places that house his equipment. The cave for vehicle and suit storage. Wayne Enterprises for his super computer access etc.

While were at it let's keep dropping other things that have been staples to the character. AND have worked successfully to help make the character great! How 'bout getting rid of the cape because who wears capes, right? It's not even realistic!

This one I have to disagree with. It always seemed unrealistic to me that a guy in a slightly souped up sedan with unnecessary additions (they would slow down your vehicle in real life), would not be followed. The police or villains should easily be able to follow Batman back to his cave, because his vehicles are so flamboyant. The tumbler proved its ability to evade being followed because of its heavy duty all-terrain nature (e.g. roof top jumps, surviving huge falls etc.).

Ditto from my last comment. What kind of Batman fan are you????


ven in the comic books, Batman is heavily armored (lead lined cowl, kevlar/nomex weave vest, millitary grade armored combat boots, weighted tips in the cape for combat and defense purposes etc). The difference is, the comic books ignore these facts and still show a skin tight costume as if all Batman wore were spandex tights. It is sort of like how nobody properly illustrates that Spider-Man wears web shooters (because realistically speaking, they would show under his gloves). Batman wears armor, thus it makes sense that in the films, he looks armored. Considering he has faced edged weapons, been shot, tazered etc, it would seem ridiculous for him to survive if all he wore were some lame cloth costume. He kind of needs armor so that you don't lose the suspension of disbelief.

again....Do you even like Batman? You sound as though you'd like the character turned into something other than what it has been, which seems to be where many of these superhero movies(and comics) are headed anyway......

I like a witty/snarky Alfred. Keeps him from being useless like many stay over characters in a supporting cast (e.g. Mary Jane became useless once she married Peter, Aunt May has been useless for decades etc.).

Mainly because of inept writers, bad writing or writers that don't respect or see the charcters potential. Many modern fanboy turned writers want to leave a mark on major heros and could care less about Aunt May, Mary Jane etc. even though said characters are important in the lives of (In this case) PETER PARKER!!!!!!! It's a case of putting themselves before the characters.

Care to explain?


Batmans voice in TDK sucked and Bale acted very over emotional during the more dramatic scenes.

Do you read Batman? Remember how he freaked out when Dick was shot by Alexander Luther? Remember how he tried to murder the joker when Jason Todd was crow barred upside the head? Batman/Bruce always freaks out when people he loves are in grave danger. He is only calm and detached when it comes to unknown civilians.

I know Batman from reading comics since about, mmm, 1982 to the current day. But I don't read comics nearly the way I used to because they don't appeal to me the way they once did...A personal preference. My last bat-book was a hard cover Denny O'neil/Neal Adams Batman special edition. It was great!

You do know that Begins was filmed in Chicago, right?

Yes, and so was Begins and it didn't look like Chicago it looked like Gotham City.

Don't feel like typing any more......

 

[The ?ion]

@ J Custer

I love Batman. He is my favorite super hero (well, Western super hero. Guyver is a close runner up). However, I can appreciate that comic books and films are very separate mediums. If this were an animated feature (as animation uses illustrations, thus linking it closer to the source material) I could understand taking on more of the flamboyant aspects of the comic. For instance, Batman Gotham Knights (a short animated feature that is canon and takes place between Begins and TDK) was very comic booky, including a full on Croc version of Jones (Killer Croc). However, you don't see that stuff appearing in the live action. Certain things ruin suspension of disbelief in a live action film, unless you have a tone set for that. TDK is very realistic.

Most of the things you ask for would come across as juvenile or outlandish. It is the same reason why the X-Men films never used the blue and yellow costumes that adorned the likes of Cyclops and Wolverine. The films had a very serious tone. Using those costumes would undermine that emotional sentiment. If you want the audience to be invested, you must be consistent. Bat finned sedans are ridiculous. Cool in the comics, but lame in the real world. I may be a Batman fan, but I am a fan of film as well. There are certain concessions that must be made if the two mediums are to reconcile their expressive modes.

 

[J. Custer]

^ I see nothing on my list that would come off as any more juvenile or outlandish than what has already been displayed in Nolans Batman movies.

 

[ALP]

I like the current set up. It seems more engrossing than the idea of a guy housing a ton of crap in a cave under his mansion. I like the fact that he has multiple places that house his equipment. The cave for vehicle and suit storage. Wayne Enterprises for his super computer access etc.

I thought Batman brooding in a brightly lit room accessed from a dumpster was lame. There was absolutely nothing visually or thematically interesting about the big white 'garbage room' Bale was in. If Nolan does not return him to Wayne Manor and the bat cave, I will be sorely disappointed.

But really? A large white room accessed from a garbage can is more engrossing than the batcave?

 

[J. Custer]

I thought Batman brooding in a brightly lit room accessed from a dumpster was lame. There was absolutely nothing visually or thematically interesting about the big white 'garbage room' Bale was in. If Nolan does not return him to Wayne Manor and the bat cave, I will be sorely disappointed.

But really? A large white room accessed from a garbage can is more engrossing than the batcave?

I know right? If Nolan has any skill, and he does we will see a visually and thematically interesting batcave.


Do we really have to keep stripping Batman down like this for the sake of realism, shame and/or acceptance? does he not then become NOT Batman? Let's not get rid of too many essentials!

 

[Bat-Mite]

The batbunker was quite boring visually. I understand its necessity in the story, but they could have at least given it an appearance more fitting for Batman. All those lights reminded me of being in the dentist's chair. I can't wait to see Nolan's version of the fully developed batcave.

 

[Mr. Earle]

I liked how Nolan cleverly changed the setting from Manor/cave to Penthouse/bunker. If he hadnt changed the mood from Begins (which in my opinion he did) it would have been fine, but those changes all together lost something from the magic of Begins and its why you'll often hear me whine that i didnt feel a lot of batmaness in TDK.

Also, i know that the bunker is supposed to look different, but it was an empty space with bright lights. Its Batman, not Happy-man!

 

[Warhammer]

Yeah, I can't wait to see the newly rebuilt Wayne Manor and the improved foundations in the southeast corner. I really want to see Nolan's vision of the batcave.

 

[redhawk23]

eh bat bunker was a temporary fix, I don't think he planned to use it for very long or very consistantly. no reason to fully furbish it

 

[Bat-Mite]

Also, i know that the bunker is supposed to look different, but it was an empty space with bright lights. Its Batman, not Happy-man!

Yeah, I think that, even if they used the exact same setting, if they'd just kept the majority of the lights turned off, it would have been more fitting for Batman. He obviously needs light to work, but the lights around the bat-computer could be turned on and just a handful of others could have been on here and there throughout the bunker. Would have given Alfred something else to nag him about as well.

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

I dunno, I liked the bunker. It wasn't the most classically Batman thing ever, but I thought it worked nice. I liked the stark visuals. Something about that wide open white room seemed almost Kubrickian.

I like the idea of a very utilitarian Batman, which is what Nolan is giving us. Bruce Wayne is not going to waste time and effort pimping something out to make it "Batman-y," least of all something/someplace that no one but he and Alfred will ever see. The Manor is being rebuilt, the cave is off limits for now, so he's making use of what he has - which happens to be a florescently lit bunker. Why dim the lights? For atmosphere? He's there to work, not to be goth.

And he'll be back in his dank underground lair soon enough.

 

[Gianakin_]

I dunno, I liked the bunker. It wasn't the most classically Batman thing ever, but I thought it worked nice. I liked the stark visuals. Something about that wide open white room seemed almost Kubrickian.

I like the idea of a very utilitarian Batman, which is what Nolan is giving us. Bruce Wayne is not going to waste time and effort pimping something out to make it "Batman-y," least of all something/someplace that no one but he and Alfred will ever see. The Manor is being rebuilt, the cave is off limits for now, so he's making use of what he has - which happens to be a florescently lit bunker. Why dim the lights? For atmosphere? He's there to work, not to be goth.

And he'll be back in his dank underground lair soon enough.

Pretty much. Especially the bolded part. Me and my friend next to me thought just that at the same time when Alfred first entered the bunker in the movie.

 

[The ?ion]

I dunno, I liked the bunker. It wasn't the most classically Batman thing ever, but I thought it worked nice. I liked the stark visuals. Something about that wide open white room seemed almost Kubrickian.

I like the idea of a very utilitarian Batman, which is what Nolan is giving us. Bruce Wayne is not going to waste time and effort pimping something out to make it "Batman-y," least of all something/someplace that no one but he and Alfred will ever see. The Manor is being rebuilt, the cave is off limits for now, so he's making use of what he has - which happens to be a florescently lit bunker. Why dim the lights? For atmosphere? He's there to work, not to be goth.

And he'll be back in his dank underground lair soon enough.

This. There would be no point to watching a Batman movie if all it did was replicate exactly what is in the book. That is what some what undermines Watchmen. In fact, many reviews cited the high level of reverence as both a pro and the con. At this point, after two films, anyone still watching these movies should be aware that Nolan is creating his own interpretation of Batman and the mythos.

I love the fact that you address that Nolan's Batman is very utilitarian rather than flamboyant like the comic book Batman. Nolan's Batman is very much about function over form (for those unfamiliar with that ideology, look into Ferrari car design, as they never have useless cutaways, spoilers or curves). Realistically, it does make little to no sense for him to purposely dim the lights just to maintain a mood that would hamper his work.

 

[Gianakin_]

I never got the reverence to the source material as a con in the case of Watchmen, but it can definitely be a con in most of the other comics. As for the bunker, it's been there in the comics, so TDK did follow the comics in that respect.

 

[The ?ion]

I never got the reverence to the source material as a con in the case of Watchmen, but it can definitely be a con in most of the other comics. As for the bunker, it's been there in the comics, so TDK did follow the comics in that respect.

It is a con, because there is no real point to doing a 1:1 replication of something in a new medium. If you have new medium, you should be doing new things. I suppose there are those people who would love to see something live action that is an exact replica of a story that they already know, but for most, the fun in seeing something recreated, is also seeing it reinterpreted.

And sometimes, reinterpretation is necessary. I know that in David Hayter's script for Watchmen, he had wanted to abandon the cold war back drop and replace it with something more contemporary (I believe it was the war on terror). And if you think about it, I am sure a lot of young people watched Watchmen and had no real clue as to why Nixon was president or what the tensions were for the cold war.

There are certain things you should never change when adapting something from one source to the next, but that should not hinder interpretation or reimagining.

 

[Gianakin_]

I agree in general, but in Watchmen's case, I'm glad it was 90% close to the GN.

 

[ALP]

Me too, I loved Watchmen and I also loved Sin City. But yeah, most of the time it's good to re-interpret things.

 

[The ?ion]

On that note, I did enjoy the fact that Watchmen was so reverent. It is even better if you watch the uncut version (Hollis fight FTW!). But artistically and commercially, I can understand why you don't want to always redo every little detail. Even Watchmen reinterpreted the ending to make it fit with the mood of the film (though I prefer the big genetic octopus mush).

Heck, reinterpretation has done wonders for this franchise. Joker's aesthetic being like war paint? Brilliant. A "Glasgow Smile" rather than a chemically altered sneer? Self woven clothing so that he is even more of an enigma? I love the TDK Joker. It would never have worked if he were a carbon copy of the comic books. The writers took all of the best elements of the comic book Joker and made him even more ominous than his comic iteration, perfectly fitting the dark and despaired world of Nolan's hopeless Gotham.

 

[ALP]

Heck, reinterpretation has done wonders for this franchise. Joker's aesthetic being like war paint? Brilliant. A "Glasgow Smile" rather than a chemically altered sneer? Self woven clothing so that he is even more of an enigma? I love the TDK Joker. It would never have worked if he were a carbon copy of the comic books. The writers took all of the best elements of the comic book Joker and made him even more ominous than his comic iteration, perfectly fitting the dark and despaired world of Nolan's hopeless Gotham.

Well it's all just what everyone feels is right or not. I both agree and disagree with this. The reinvention of the Joker worked wonders for the world that Nolan created. I definitely agree there, I really liked it. But I also love the comic Joker and I think a closer translation would also work well in the right circumstances. The perma-white daper Joker will always be my favorite. I mean I am one of the few that prefers the direction of Jack Nicholson's Joker.

But I think I also prefer Zack Snyder's ending to the comic book ending of Watchmen. It's just a matter of each preference and choice being unique.

 

[Bat-Mite]

I dunno, I liked the bunker. It wasn't the most classically Batman thing ever, but I thought it worked nice. I liked the stark visuals. Something about that wide open white room seemed almost Kubrickian.

I thought that it was adequate, but that's it. My problem with it was that there was nothing remotely Batman-like about it. If you didn't know there was a batsuit hidden in it, it could just as easily be something out of James Bond or Mission Impossible.

I like the idea of a very utilitarian Batman, which is what Nolan is giving us. Bruce Wayne is not going to waste time and effort pimping something out to make it "Batman-y," least of all something/someplace that no one but he and Alfred will ever see. The Manor is being rebuilt, the cave is off limits for now, so he's making use of what he has - which happens to be a florescently lit bunker. Why dim the lights? For atmosphere? He's there to work, not to be goth.

I like the utilitarian nature to him as well, but I also don't think there's any harm in showing a bit more of his dark, brooding nature. I'm not one of those people that thinks batwings on the batmobile are essential, but the dude uses the bat as a symbol for a reason, and I don't think it would hurt to reflect that a bit more in the surroundings he chooses. If a brightly lit bunker works so well for him, then there's no need to bother with a cave at all. It would probably be easier and cheaper to build a bunker above ground near his manor, and when asked, he could just say he uses it for storage or something.

I never got the reverence to the source material as a con in the case of Watchmen, but it can definitely be a con in most of the other comics. As for the bunker, it's been there in the comics, so TDK did follow the comics in that respect.

I never got that either, since Watchmen is a self-contained story that isn't connected to any other comics or anything like that. It's not always a good idea to change something just for the sake of changing it. It's a R rated movie. The target audience is obviously adults, so they're going to be educated enough to follow the story and its relevance in most cases. No need to change the story up and modernize it just because you underestimate your audience's intelligence.

 

[The ?ion]

Well it's all just what everyone feels is right or not. I both agree and disagree with this. The reinvention of the Joker worked wonders for the world that Nolan created. I definitely agree there, I really liked it. But I also love the comic Joker and I think a closer translation would also work well in the right circumstances. The perma-white daper Joker will always be my favorite. I mean I am one of the few that prefers the direction of Jack Nicholson's Joker.

But I think I also prefer Zack Snyder's ending to the comic book ending of Watchmen. It's just a matter of each preference and choice being unique.

I like Jack's Joker and Heath's Joker equally, but differently.

 

[ALP]

"Differently" is the key, a different take for a different interpretation. Whether it is something very close to the comics, something very different than the comics, or something in between. It's all about the context. Sometimes changes are necessary while other times faithfulness is necessary. We were talking about this sort of thing on the spidey boards not long ago, "is it okay to like some drastic changes from the comics but dislike others?" Essentially yes.

 

[The Guard]

Something about that wide open white room seemed almost Kubrickian.

?

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4004/4334779927_ea7a66292d.jpg

 

[The Guard]

Something about that wide open white room seemed almost Kubrickian.

Kinda...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4004/4334779927_ea7a66292d.jpg