The Dark Knight Your thoughts on how it should Begin.

[Crooklyn]

Because it is just like put 1st scene with Batman in first minutes of BB. It is the half of attraction, which would be used in the beginning, when you don't need to show the main scenes.

Umm...what? English, please?

It wasn't the intro of TDK, it would be good intro for BB3, but not for TDK.

Yes, if Nolan chose to tell the films in a chronological order. But since he doesn't seem to do that at all with any of his movies, I'm merely suggesting a way in which he might tell the story for TDK and the sequels; flashbacks.

Really, I just can't understand the whole your point.

You're telling me. It's plainfully obvious English isn't your first language, and I've been patient with trying to decipher your incoherent sentences.

Seems to me you just can't seem to understand a simple point: a story is however you want it to be. That includes what elements are told first (intro), how it is unfolded (majority of the movie), and the final closing moments (ending). There is no such thing as a blueprint for storytelling. Which means there is no right & wrong about scene placement. You can disagree with it, but in the end it's all up to the writer.

 

[Cyrusbales]

Yep.

Uuuhh, it just didn't work, because the movie should be focused on the main character, not the main villian.

Oh, so you want to see Joker at first minutes of TDK and then get disappointed, because after 1st act there won't be anything so exciting like 1st scene with him. TDK should begin with Bruce, because he is the main hero and Nolan is going to focus on him, not Joker, like it happened with B89 (and this was also big mistake, even if movie didn't begin with Joker).

So your sayin B89 and Batman returns didn't work as films?

 

[Cinemaman]

So your sayin B89 and Batman returns didn't work as films?

No, they didn't work in development of the main characters, because of making more attention to the villians.

 

[Cyrusbales]

No, they didn't work in development of the main characters, because of making more attention to the villians.

yeah, keeping the dark knight really mysterious and making the over the top villain the centre attraction was stupid? BATMAN IS NOTHING WITHOUT VILLIANS!!! He has nothing to do without villains, so of course, vilains will be the centre of his life, and thus it makes sense to make the movee that way. It's like batman's movie, he wouldn't focus on himself, so why should we? It's a more intelligent way of making a film

 

[Cinemaman]

Umm...what? English, please?


Yes, if Nolan chose to tell the films in a chronological order. But since he doesn't seem to do that at all with any of his movies, I'm merely suggesting a way in which he might tell the story for TDK and the sequels; flashbacks.


You're telling me. It's plainfully obvious English isn't your first language, and I've been patient with trying to decipher your incoherent sentences.

Seems to me you just can't seem to understand a simple point: a story is however you want it to be. That includes what elements are told first (intro), how it is unfolded (majority of the movie), and the final closing moments (ending). There is no such thing as a blueprint for storytelling. Which means there is no right & wrong about scene placement. You can disagree with it, but in the end it's all up to the writer.

Ok, I'll explain you this again. Putting Joker in the beginning of TDK is something like putting Batman in the beginning of BB. It won't work, because it is a half of the whole attraction in the movies, which should be used only after 1st act (like Nolan did this in BB).

Do you really believe he will do this? Besides, Nolan choosed to tell the story in BB in a chronological order.

No, the language is not the problem of our argue. The problem is our points of view. We have different opinions on how should TDK begin.

 

[Cinemaman]

yeah, keeping the dark knight really mysterious and making the over the top villain the centre attraction was stupid? BATMAN IS NOTHING WITHOUT VILLIANS!!! He has nothing to do without villains, so of course, vilains will be the centre of his life, and thus it makes sense to make the movee that way. It's like batman's movie, he wouldn't focus on himself, so why should we? It's a more intelligent way of making a film

What? Batman is the main character, and the movie should always be focused on him. The development of this character is much more important than effective appearance of his villian. Batman is the center of the movie and Bruce's life.

 

[Cyrusbales]

What? Batman is the main character, and the movie should always be focused on him. The development of this character is much more important than effective appearance of his villian. Batman is the center of the movie and Bruce's life.

I'm guessing you like formulaic films? You don't like the idea of going beyond the usual? And Batman is Bruce, so the thing he concentrates on is villains. Batman wouldn't exist without them. Please, try to extend yourself here.

 

[Crooklyn]

Ok, I'll explain you this again. Putting Joker in the beginning of TDK is something like putting Batman in the beginning of BB. It won't work, because it is a half of the whole attraction in the movies, which should be used only after 1st act (like Nolan did this in BB).

It's not the same because Joker has no backstory. Part of what makes him interesting is no one knows who he is.

Do you really believe he will do this? Besides, Nolan choosed to tell the story in BB in a chronological order.

Do you watch Nolan's films? I guess you just completely missed out on the fact Memento was a complete opposite of chronological storytelling, BB's ENTIRE first-half moved back and forth between present and past time, not to mention Nolan has also mentioned The Prestige will also be going through different time periods of the magicians' lives all throughout the movie.

Nolan's movies do not completely go chronological. Period.

 

[NinjaTurtleFan]

I think it should start off with a flash back to the Joker's origin. You see a criminal, maybe not in a big red helmet but maybe in a unique looking red ski mask, running from the cops in a chemical plant, they corner him on a cat walk, one officer shoots, it hits near his foot, the criminal jumps back, hits the guard rail and topples over, then Sploosh!, he hits the toxic vat below!

Then you see after the cops leave a hand rise from the sludge and dramatically he rises as the Joker with a horrific scream.

Then the bats flock, maybe a voice over of Batman recapping his life so far, or somekind of recap, then the logo and it'll say The Dark Knight, or it could lead into him saying something like "I am Gotham's guardian, I am The Dark Knight", then the title comes up. t:

I LOVE IT! Then of course you could fastforward to a couple of months later after "Begins" ended. Batman is on a crusade with Gordon to try and hunt down the Joker. Many are becoming sketpic they'll ever catch this wide-grinned, pale-skinned serial killer. So of course Harvey Dent comes in, they form a pact, but Dent doesn't trust Batman till movie's end---like Gordon in "Begins."

Unlike Burton's "Batman" Joker's plan this time around is to become King of Gotham. He wants to own the streets now that Falcone is gone. But he's got competition in the form of The Penguin, Maronis, and Thornes. So throughout the movie there's a mob war, people die left to right, and the Thornes are sent to jail by Dent and Gordon, while the Maronis die, and Batman catches the Joker at movie's end.

The Penguin however escapes to live on another day/movie.

 

[chosen1]

I think it should began with the bats flying around just like the first one. maybe w/ a differnet color sky mabe blue or purple for the joker. Then have a quick cut scene (just like the one they did when bruce first finds the cave then it cuts to falcone and crane talking.) to a court room w/ the camera moving closer to joker as his back is turned facing the judge. Someone is talking maybe dent as far as how they want to prosecute or what jokers crimes were and go from there.

 

[Batgort]

Looking at how action movies are made, I think it's safe to say that the beginning of the movie is going to be some kind of "hook" to draw us into the movie. Either re-introducing Batman to the movie, or introducing the Joker committing a crime -- I doubt it would be like Batman eating breakfast or anything silly like that.

If you look at how BB started, it had an escalating pace that alternated between flash back and present day, and it kept on escalating until Bruce became Batman and we had the big scene at the docks and saving Rachel. After that, it continued it's pace until the end.

Nolan also had that quote of not following the same exact formula from BB for TDK. I think what he meant here is that he is not going to do the alternating flash back formula again (just as he won't do the backwards-time thing form Memento again).

I think Nolan's formula for procuding the movie are one of his strongest and unique traits in the industry, so seeing the tempo, pace, and feel of the movie is something I'm really looking forward to.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Sheesh. Normally I'm pro-life, but this thread should have been aborted.

 

[Cinemaman]

I'm guessing you like formulaic films? You don't like the idea of going beyond the usual? And Batman is Bruce, so the thing he concentrates on is villains. Batman wouldn't exist without them. Please, try to extend yourself here.

Well, it depends on the movie.

Yes, but still, villians are nothing without Batman, who is center of the story.

 

[Cinemaman]

It's not the same because Joker has no backstory. Part of what makes him interesting is no one knows who he is.


Do you watch Nolan's films? I guess you just completely missed out on the fact Memento was a complete opposite of chronological storytelling, BB's ENTIRE first-half moved back and forth between present and past time, not to mention Nolan has also mentioned The Prestige will also be going through different time periods of the magicians' lives all throughout the movie.

Nolan's movies do not completely go chronological. Period.

Well, I think Nolan confirmed that Joker will have backstory, though I don't think he will tell much more about this character.

Yes, I watch them and I love his direction style. Memento was excellent movie and there is no mistakes in the movie, but TDK isn't Memento. And don't forget Insomnia, which had chronological order. But if TDK is still great movie without this chronological order, then I am fine with this.

 

[Cyrusbales]

Well, it depends on the movie.

Yes, but still, villians are nothing without Batman, who is center of the story.

Well if batman wasn't there, there would still be villains, they'd have an easier time and everything, but if there wasn't villains, then batman would be obselete. Villains aren't there JUST because of batman, they'd prefer if he wasn't there, so batman is dependant on badguys, not the other way round.

 

[Sentinel X]

Either two ways.

a. Start off with Bruce having a nightmare about the death of his parents...That way audience will remember the tragic side of Bruce's life

b. A crime scene investigation reintroducing Rachael and Gordon, with one of the Joker's victims

 

[Vile]

How it should begin?

I think it would be cool to see Batman going after Crane (in full Scarecrow mode) who's been kidnapping and murdering former Falcone mob guys.

I just imagine Batman slinking through the shadows of an old warehouse and all you hear is Murphy's voice as he's spouting nursery rhymes.

Kinda creepy, and we need some closure on Crane!

 

[Cinemaman]

I'd like to also see a crime investigation with Joker's victim as opening scene