Batman 3

[esoobaC .T bocaJ]

Entertainment Weekly got the chance to speak to Christian Bale, who revealed that the upcoming "The Dark Knight" leaves room for a third and final film.

"Knowing the 'Dark Knight' story, I would like very much to complete a trilogy," said Bale. "And I think that knowing the story of 'The Dark Knight,' it leaves you anticipating something that really can get very, very interesting for a third. Now, the question would be: Is Chris [Nolan] going to be doing it? Because to me I find it tricky to imagine working on it without it being a collaboration with Chris."

He added that even though he is completely on board, "the decision is out of my hands."

This is the first time that we are hearing about the big opening at the end of "The Dark Knight," but this isn't the first time Bale mentions the Batman trilogy. He first talked about it when "Justice League of America" was steeping on Bale's and Nolan's toes. The actor was upset that Warner Bros was re-introducing the character in a different movie, while a successful film series was still going on.

[bratpop]

duUUUUUUUUUuuuuuh!

I don't like his "very very interesting" statement. That means they messed with something, trying to be clever. Trying to be clever, which is all too common these days, usually means trouble especially for an iconic franchise. "Very very interesting" sequel potential reminds me of Batman turning into a vampire at the end of Red Rain, or something that someone would say about Superman having a kid who might have powers. I just want a decent Batman movie, not one that ends with a really interesting meeting of a little boy named Dick, or where Alfred gets superpowers, or where Two-Face becomes president, or Bruce gets bat DNA, or anything else that one wouldn't expect.

[a pretty girl is like]

Christian Bale to Warner's:  Bigger bags of money, please.

[SmilinJackRoss]

duUUUUUUUUUuuuuuh!

I don't like his "very very interesting" statement. That means they messed with something, trying to be clever. Trying to be clever, which is all too common these days, usually means trouble especially for an iconic franchise. "Very very interesting" sequel potential reminds me of Batman turning into a vampire at the end of Red Rain, or something that someone would say about Superman having a kid who might have powers. I just want a decent Batman movie, not one that ends with a really interesting meeting of a little boy named Dick, or where Alfred gets superpowers, or where Two-Face becomes president, or Bruce gets bat DNA, or anything else that one wouldn't expect.

You can find the negative in anything, can't you?

[esoobaC .T bocaJ]

Truth is, they gave it away months ago

HI, I'm becoming obsessed with posting quotes... so here's another

Director Christopher Nolan claims that, while the Joker is the most high-profile new character featured in "The Dark Knight," the movie actually belongs to District Attorney Harvey Dent. [via IGN]

Speaking to Los Angeles Times, Nolan said, "Harvey Dent is a tragic figure, and his story is the backbone of this film." Dent, who is a handsom and politically ambitious district attorney ends up scarred and turns into Two-Face, who is believed to be the main villain in the third installment.

"The Joker, he sort of cuts through (The Dark Knight)," Nolan explained. "He's got no story arc, he's just a force of nature tearing through. Heath [Ledger] has given an amazing performance in the role, it's really extraordinary. It's a dark and complex story, and the villains are dark and complex as well."

The Times also confirms rumors that made the rounds online last year that Cillian Murphy will reprise his role from "Batman Begins" as The Scarecrow in "The Dark Knight."

[Brak]

Well it's totally fine with me that they make a 3rd movie. Dont see anything negative about that. I am happy happy happy about it. 

[Variety of Cells]

duUUUUUUUUUuuuuuh!

I don't like his "very very interesting" statement. That means they messed with something, trying to be clever. Trying to be clever, which is all too common these days, usually means trouble especially for an iconic franchise. "Very very interesting" sequel potential reminds me of Batman turning into a vampire at the end of Red Rain, or something that someone would say about Superman having a kid who might have powers. I just want a decent Batman movie, not one that ends with a really interesting meeting of a little boy named Dick, or where Alfred gets superpowers, or where Two-Face becomes president, or Bruce gets bat DNA, or anything else that one wouldn't expect.

I agree.  We wouldn't want something unexpected to happen in a movie.  That defeats the whole purpose of telling a story, which is to relate to you information you already know or could predict.  A good surprise is being surprised that you weren't surprised, that's what I always say. 

[Doctor Who?]

Yeah I mean they should just release Batman Forever again.

You know you are in trouble when a filmmaker says he wants to try something new.

New things never work.

I mean no movie that has ever tried anything new has ever been good.

If they want this movie not to suck they should just make it two hours of comic book guy reading some of the comics,now that is good filmmaking and it shows respect to the comics.

[bratpop]

Okay, first of all, you people just love to argue and attacking me is not positive. If you read my posts beyond the first "negative" thing just to shout "NEGATIVE!" you'd know damn well I was talking about Joel Schumacher-level surprises that change the mythos in such a way that even long time Batman fans would never expect, and not simple, expected surprises like actually staying true to the source material or having Joker shoot somebody in the face.

Secondly, what do you think is more annoying for the lurkers on the forum? The one annoying guy on the forum, or the ten people who have to constantly say the exact same thing about how the one guy on the forum is annoying? If I was a lurker, that would drive me to Cinematic Titanic's forum. And that's a fate worse than death. Nice job.

[Variety of Cells]

I'm contesting that breaking from a mythos or source material is not a bad idea if it's for the sake of a better film.  Film and comic books are not the same thing.  It doesn't make sense to criticize a future film for changing something when you don't know what that change is.  By criticizing changes that don't exist yet, you are criticizing the very nature of change.  You are contesting that changes should never be made.  Because if that's not your argument, then your argument is "Bad changes shouldn't be made because they change stuff.  But good changes are good because they are expected."  Which is the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard. 

And personally, when I lurk, I enjoy seeing an annoying person repeatedly rebuked.  If I happen to find that person annoying, it makes me feel good to see that a bunch of others agree.  However, I'm not arguing with you because you're annoying, but I feel your assumptions are wrong and misguided, in an 'I'm angry just to be angry' sort of way. 

[Doctor Who?]

Yeah bratpop I have nothing against you it's just the way you seem to give very upcoming movie and video game a damning one 1.0 review before anyone has even seen it.

If you want to give the next Batman movie a 1.0 review after we have seen it I am all for it,but could you wait until they have shot at least one frame before doing it.

Also when you say that change is bad before you have seen the change you are in fact saying that all change is bad,that is what I was making fun of not you per say.

[bratpop]

I'm not saying what will be good or bad, I just feel for the nerds. And I just know the nerds freak out whenever the slightest thing changes. So when they're dealing with superheroes, they need to tread lightly and not change things just for the hell of it (or for Nolan's ego). Pretty much every change in any comic movie has been met with criticism, right down to not actually casting Superman as himself.  They already gave Brucey a ridiculous new motorcycle suit and toy motorcycle to match, and got a lot of flak for that stupid microwave thing. But look, it's Chris Nolan. When it's suggested there's a twist at the end of the new Batman movie, that ain't good. That ain't like, "Ooh, a Joker card!" That's like, "Huh, Batman was really Alfred all along." And you have to remember these people don't really give a f*ck about the comics, so when they think something can take them in a really exciting new direction, they don't care if it goes against everything Batman stands for, or if he starts wearing a white rubber suit from now on.

Or, you know, maybe Mr. Bale is just bullshitting the press about how great the ending of this movie is when really nothing happens except for Harv becoming Two-Face, which we already know.

[Doctor Who?]

The best thing to do when writing anything is to ignore the fans.

Half of them will always hate any change and the other half will complain that they have seen it all before.

All you can do is what you think is a good idea at the time and if it fail and people get mad at you it fails,but at least you got the thing made.

I am a huge comic book fan and I love Superman Returns,the Fantastic Four movies,1989 Batman,Batman Begins,and I enjoy parts of Superman 3 so it takes all sorts.

Personally I am glad that we have someone like Nolan who isn't afraid of the fans making these movies.

I would rather see a bad movie that tried something new and failed then see a good one that was just what we had seen before with better SFX.

[bratpop]

So... you'd rather see Tim Burton's Nick Cage as black-clad Superman with a logo that turns into bladed weapons? Well, me too. But we are the minority. And they're building a wall to keep us out.

[GLaDOS]

I think Pan-am is one of the greatest super guys ever. Now, where's my fifty?!