The Dark Knight What's the need to recycle Rachel Dawes and Scarecrow?

[Damobi]

Either way, I don't care ...I'm just glad Scarecrow's back and hopefully gonna have resolution!!! Last I was aware, Cillian Murphy had not signed on anything for TDK??? Would I be right in assuming that they just use an extra in a mask and use a distorted voice for him in this film?

 

[Juanigi]

no, he's in chicago, doing the role.

 

[yankee]

Im not expecting much scenes of Scarecrow and hopefully the same for Dawes. The recast ruins the reality forte by Nolan. If Katie remained as Dawes I'd welcome the continuation of her character and rela.with Bruce.
Now Im ok letting her go even cheering on once she dies on the movie.
Same with Spiderman fans cheering loudly in the theatre when evil Peter hit MJ by mistake.t:

 

[Saint]

You guys slay me. Every time a comic book film has more than two or three characters (hint: every movie, period) you all start fussing. Do you guys ever, you know, watch movies? Do ever actually consider the number of important characters in them?

I mean, you don't watch The Empire Strikes Back and complain that Boba Fett and Lando make the film too crowded, right? Nor do you say "They shouldn't have recycled Obi-Wan's ghost!" When you sit down and watch Return of the Jedi, are you thinking "Jabba, Boba, Vader, the Emperor, too many villains!"

The bottom line is that a film feeling crowded actually has nothing to do with the number of characters, and everything to do with the writer. If the writer is incompetent, the film will feel crowded. If the writer is not incompetent, it won't. Fanboys have this ridiculous idea in their head that because BF and B&R had multiple villains and failed that all comic book movies with multiple villains will fail. I'm sorry, but this is plainly stupid (much like the belief that Robin automatically equals failure). Those films were crap because the writers were idiots. End of story. Great films have multiple villains all the time. Open your eyes.

 

[Gianakin_]

I don't think this is going to happen. She is coming back for a reason and I'm willing to bet she has a big role as well. Scarecrow came back to serve a purpose and probably have a kind of resolution. Rachel had resolution in Begins, so to bring her back means that Nolan has something in store for her. And I mean "main part" something.

 

[Zaphod]

Nolan wants to build up a real world over the course of these three films. When you look at the past Batman films, the villains from each movie vanish with each subsequent instalment, making the films seem more segmented and unrelated. A case in point being Catwomen's absence from Forever, even though we're reminded of her presence at the finale of Returns. By having characters & villains return, and more importantly, not killing them-off, we can see Gotham City grow and develop with some proper continuity over the course of the trilogy.

I'm not too concerned with The Dark Knight being to busy or jam packed. Begins managed to make sense with multiple villains, and we even had an origin story to boot. Without the latter in this next instalment, I'm sure all the pieces of the puzzle will fit together nicely.

 

[itsthebatman]

You guys slay me. Every time a comic book film has more than two or three characters (hint: every movie, period) you all start fussing. Do you guys ever, you know, watch movies? Do ever actually consider the number of important characters in them?

I mean, you don't watch The Empire Strikes Back and complain that Boba Fett and Lando make the film too crowded, right? Nor do you say "They shouldn't have recycled Obi-Wan's ghost!" When you sit down and watch Return of the Jedi, are you thinking "Jabba, Boba, Vader, the Emperor, too many villains!"

The bottom line is that a film feeling crowded actually has nothing to do with the number of characters, and everything to do with the writer. If the writer is incompetent, the film will feel crowded. If the writer is not incompetent, it won't. Fanboys have this ridiculous idea in their head that because BF and B&R had multiple villains and failed that all comic book movies with multiple villains will fail. I'm sorry, but this is plainly stupid (much like the belief that Robin automatically equals failure). Those films were crap because the writers were idiots. End of story. Great films have multiple villains all the time. Open your eyes.

If the internet had been around when those films were being made, we may well have heard that kind of crap. With a year until the film opens, people are just obsessing over every detail because it's possible to, and to share that obsession with more people than ever before. Bottom line, as you say, is what's done with them not how many there are.

 

[Figs]

I'm also happy for the fact that Scarecrow will be returning and that he is the first Batman villian to be in more than one film. We all should have seen it coming as a definite. At the end of Begins, they wouldn't have had to have Gordon say "and we still haven't picked up Crane or half the inmates of Arkham" if he wasn't going to return. They could have left out Crane's name in that statement if he wasn't going to return in The Dark Knight. Remember Nolan/Goyer did say they had these films planned out in the beginning.

As far as Rachel Dawes, I didn't mind her in the first one. I understood her reasoning for being in the film, as well as im happy that there not doing the usual. Which is a new love interest for each film.

 

[Delete]

Okay, look, it's this 'THERE-MUST-BE-A-NEW-VILLIAN-EVERY-MOVIE' fever that can kill the franchise. Or any superhero movie franchise.

The real gift of any good superhero movie franchise is developing a story arc that is so well written that it can easily span several movies. Otherwise, the "new villian each and every movie" schtick would follow such a strict formula that each and every movie would be a carbon copy of the previous movie. It just wouldn't be very pretty at all.

Racheal is extremely important to the new Batman mythos. She is responsible for turning Bruce in a direction that puts him on the road to finding himself. Even after the events in Batman Begins, she is still his voice of reason - his balance. Because Bruce is still a little rough around the edges. He still has the tendency to give in to his anger and rage. Rachael still needs to be there to help remind him about the moral high road and the need to bring justice to Gotham instead of just slaughtering the wicked. Bruce still needs Rachael for her guidance.

And Scarecrow - he's awesome. Cillian Murphy is awesome. Enough said.

And the Penguin never, EVER needs to be mentioned in the Nolan universe.

Story arcs that encompass several movies is the sign of a well written, well acted, well produced, well made movie.

This is the kind of thing that can go either way though. The Superman movies have way overused Lex Luthor.

 

[Bond]

This is the kind of thing that can go either way though. The Superman movies have way overused Lex Luthor.

That's because Superman has absolutely 0 interesting villains.

 

[sasquatchs]

Yea, waaay over used. Them spanning multiple films is new, Scarecrow will probably die in this one, leaving Joker to pickup the 2 film mantle

 

[pjspider1C]

Assuming Joker is one of the inmates who escaped from Arkham in Batman Begins, it's reasonable to assume that Scarecrow has some inside information on the Joker, seeing as though he was a therapist there and all. Could Batman & Rachel Dawes be trying to get info on Joker from a reluctant Scarecrow? Hmmm...

 

[Cyclops3235]

Assuming Joker is one of the inmates who escaped from Arkham in Batman Begins, it's reasonable to assume that Scarecrow has some inside information on the Joker, seeing as though he was a therapist there and all. Could Batman & Rachel Dawes be trying to get info on Joker from a reluctant Scarecrow? Hmmm...

that is a good thought, but it looks like Joker and Scarecrow will be leading opposite gangs in a semi-gang war..... just my thought.

 

[pjspider1C]

^ That's still entirely possible and would even work hand-in-hand with my idea.

 

[sasquatchs]

that is a good thought, but it looks like Joker and Scarecrow will be leading opposite gangs in a semi-gang war..... just my thought.

Scarecrow could get caught, then it's part of a deal he makes with Dent. I'm still wondering how sane Crane is, already moreso than I expected

 

[smatt584]

If the two "freak" gangs collide, there would be some great opportunities for cool scenes. A bit of a show-down between the Joker and Crane would be awesome. Crane could be like: "I know all about you, crazy; Let's see what you're afraid of." and then he could try to gas him and get his ass handed to him by the joker when it doesn't work.

 

[Doc Samson]

Assuming Joker is one of the inmates who escaped from Arkham in Batman Begins, it's reasonable to assume that Scarecrow has some inside information on the Joker, seeing as though he was a therapist there and all. Could Batman & Rachel Dawes be trying to get info on Joker from a reluctant Scarecrow? Hmmm...

Interesting idea. I forget who said it on here, but it would be cool to have a Silence of the Lambs type of feel where they question a locked-up Scarecrow about one of the crazy inmates who may have become the Joker. Regardless, I'm glad for once that Batman isn't killing villains and has to constantly deal with these lunatics. Isn't that how the comics are anyway, as much as he'd like to, he can't kill any of these guys which essentially leaves Gotham in a cycle of terror over and over again making his presence all the more neccessary...

 

[Victarion]

How can you not need to recycle Scarecrow?

 

[shapeshifter]

That's because Superman has absolutely 0 interesting villains.

hey thats not true there's
ummmmmm
well there is that guy who.....no he's kind of lame.
Umm Zod, eh, he's over used.
Bizarro, no wait he's like superman with down syndrome
ummmmmm braniac. well no he is a PC with a bad attitude
how about metello. oh yeah he sucks.
dammit your right.

how can a hero so cool have villans who suck so much?

 

[magus]

Is it because of Nolan's loyalty to the actors and scriptwriters? I want to see new villains like the Penguin or Riddler, and less so with Scarecrow. There are going to be 3 movies from Nolan, so a variety of villains is needed.

As for Rachel Dawes, I believe it's even more unnecessary. Batman doesn't require a romantic arc that will cut off some time for action scenes.

Batman:
More action scenes
More detective scenes
Less romance
Less people gawking over Bat-Toys
Less recycled villain

Because we have no idea what happened to him at the end of the first movie, he was never caught. As was stated above he could be running the entire crime sector of Gotham by now.

 

[Comic Book Boy]

You guys slay me. Every time a comic book film has more than two or three characters (hint: every movie, period) you all start fussing. Do you guys ever, you know, watch movies? Do ever actually consider the number of important characters in them?

I mean, you don't watch The Empire Strikes Back and complain that Boba Fett and Lando make the film too crowded, right? Nor do you say "They shouldn't have recycled Obi-Wan's ghost!" When you sit down and watch Return of the Jedi, are you thinking "Jabba, Boba, Vader, the Emperor, too many villains!"

The bottom line is that a film feeling crowded actually has nothing to do with the number of characters, and everything to do with the writer. If the writer is incompetent, the film will feel crowded. If the writer is not incompetent, it won't. Fanboys have this ridiculous idea in their head that because BF and B&R had multiple villains and failed that all comic book movies with multiple villains will fail. I'm sorry, but this is plainly stupid (much like the belief that Robin automatically equals failure). Those films were crap because the writers were idiots. End of story. Great films have multiple villains all the time. Open your eyes.

Nice!

Also I hated how Burton just erased Viki Vale from BATMAN RETURNS. Such a copout. Same thing with Nicole Kidman.

One of the things I liked in the X-MEN films is that it has, for the most part, the SAME villians in each movie. It really provided some interesting dynamics and erased the "villian-of-the-week" factor.

 

[Anguissette1979]

Nice!

Also I hated how Burton just erased Viki Vale from BATMAN RETURNS. Such a copout. Same thing with Nicole Kidman.

One of the things I liked in the X-MEN films is that it has, for the most part, the SAME villians in each movie. It really provided some interesting dynamics and erased the "villian-of-the-week" factor.

X-Men 3 got a bit of that but it was generally ok.

Continuity =