The Dark Knight Why aren't they...

[L0ngsh0t]

You can be pissed off walking out of a theater and still have enjoyed the movie. For example, I love the show 24, but every Monday night at 9:59 i'm extremely pissed off. I enjoyed the show, but I hate the idea of waiting another week to continue it. For a movie like Pirates 2, you could have loved the movie, but still hate the fact that it'll be a whole year until you can watch the rest of it.

And he wasn't stating an opinion, he was making a prediction of a fact. He was guessing, based on what he saw, that most other people would probably be just as pissed off as he was. And he was probably right, I know I felt that way.

He was making a broad generalization, based on his opinion of the movie

I personally love cliff hangers

 

[Castlewood]

I have a feeling that TDK will end on a cliffhanger.

--dk7

I don't agree... and I'm not trying to be mean, but here's why I think differently.

Batman Begins is a "stand alone" movie. In other words, you can watch Batman Begins, and then when you watch The Dark Knight, you didn't really miss anything if you've never seen Batman Begins.

I think Nolan will make The Dark Knight a "stand-alone" movie too. Nolan isn't someone who makes cliffhangers, or makes things repetitive. If I had to guess what The Dark Knight will be like, it's this:

- The opening titles with the bats will NOT be in this one. It might have a similar opening like The Prestige did. I think we'll actually see the words "THE DARK KNIGHT" on the screen, at the beginning of the movie.

- This movie will have NOTHING to do with "Begins"... and you know what? It doesn't have to. The Dark Knight doesn't need to talk about Ra's Al Ghul, The League of Shadows, Bruce's "origin"...it's all DONE. The main focus of this film will be The Joker's crazy acts, and therefore it's ALLOWED to be a stand-alone movie. There should NOT be any "continuations" here.

If that's true... then this movie will definitely have an ENDING to it. It will be ONE movie, and there's no point in "hinting" at a third movie. We ALL know that there will be a third... they're freakin' signed on.

LET THE DARK KNIGHT BE IT'S OWN MOVIE.... NOT HALF OF ONE BIGASS MOVIE.

 

[Sun_Down]

I don't agree... and I'm not trying to be mean, but here's why I think differently.

Batman Begins is a "stand alone" movie. In other words, you can watch Batman Begins, and then when you watch The Dark Knight, you didn't really miss anything if you've never seen Batman Begins.

I think Nolan will make The Dark Knight a "stand-alone" movie too. Nolan isn't someone who makes cliffhangers, or makes things repetitive. If I had to guess what The Dark Knight will be like, it's this:

- The opening titles with the bats will NOT be in this one. It might have a similar opening like The Prestige did. I think we'll actually see the words "THE DARK KNIGHT" on the screen, at the beginning of the movie.

- This movie will have NOTHING to do with "Begins"... and you know what? It doesn't have to. The Dark Knight doesn't need to talk about Ra's Al Ghul, The League of Shadows, Bruce's "origin"...it's all DONE. The main focus of this film will be The Joker's crazy acts, and therefore it's ALLOWED to be a stand-alone movie. There should NOT be any "continuations" here.

If that's true... then this movie will definitely have an ENDING to it. It will be ONE movie, and there's no point in "hinting" at a third movie. We ALL know that there will be a third... they're freakin' signed on.

LET THE DARK KNIGHT BE IT'S OWN MOVIE.... NOT HALF OF ONE BIGASS MOVIE.

It can be its own movie and still be in continuity with Begins and reference it in non-essential ways. Begins had a resolution to it plot as well as the Joker cliff-hanger. It doesn't have to be one way or the other.

 

[Castlewood]

It can be its own movie and still be in continuity with Begins and reference it in non-essential ways. Begins had a resolution to it plot as well as the Joker cliff-hanger. It doesn't have to be one way or the other.

I don't look at the end of Begins as a cliff-hanger. To me, it's just the ending. Remember, at that time, we weren't 100% sure if there WOULD be a sequel, nor did we know who the Joker would be.
So, to me... it feels very much like the end of Godzilla (1998)... bad example, I know... where there is just ONE egg at the end, indicating that there will be a sequel - but there never was one.
(On a side note, I don't get why Godzilla never had a sequel, since it made over 100 million)

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

"Cliffhanger" is a tricky term.

There are the traditional cliffhangers, like the Adam West style "Batman is trapped in a giant blender; will he survive?" Movie examples would be Marty stuck in 1955 in BTTF2 or Neo in a coma in Matrix Reloaded. These cliffhangers were allowed to be employed because the films were shot back to back and the audience only had to wait a matter of months as opposed to years.

And then there is simply leaving certain plot threads open, with the intention of wrapping them up in the next film. Or leaving the seeds of a potential new story, while the primary story of the film has concluded. This is what Nolan did in BB, with the line "...we still haven't picked up Crane or half the inmates of Arkham that he freed," and of course, the Joker card. The idea is that the battle has been won, but the war rages on. BB can be a stand alone film; even the Joker card could be explained away (as Nolan has done in the past) as simply "a nod to the fans" or a "potential" direction for a sequel. Liken Begins to Spider-Man, we know Harry's vengeance will play a factor later on, we just don't know when or how.

Accordingly, I think the Dark Knight will be comparable to Spider-Man 2, in that, again the film's primary storyline has been resolved, but it ends with an even more immediate and clear segue (Harry finding the Goblin gear/ Harvey getting scarred [a guess]) while at the same time not leaving us entirely dangling.

 

[Castlewood]

Accordingly, I think the Dark Knight will be comparable to Spider-Man 2, in that, again the film's primary storyline has been resolved, but it ends with an even more immediate and clear segue (Harry finding the Goblin gear/ Harvey getting scarred [a guess]) while at the same time not leaving us entirely dangling.

See, I like THAT.

Now, a cliffhanger, as opposed to what you just said... would be something like.... Batman is talking to Gordon at the end of The Dark Knight, and Gordon tells him that there was an accident at the Gotham Circus, and one of performers - a little boy - had just tragically lost his family.

 

[Katsuro]

See, I like THAT.

Now, a cliffhanger, as opposed to what you just said... would be something like.... Batman is talking to Gordon at the end of The Dark Knight, and Gordon tells him that there was an accident at the Gotham Circus, and one of performers - a little boy - had just tragically lost his family.

Eh, i think that's still fairly in the realm of what we had with BB. Opening something up for a new movie, but still closing major plot threads from that movie.

A real example of a cliffhanger would be if Gordon told Batman that Joker had someone hostage, and he needs to go save them, then the credits roll.

A cliffhanger only applies to the main, central conflict. Rescueing the girl, catching the bad guy, saving the city, whatever that may be. If it's not completed by the end of the movie, then you have a cliffhanger.