DVDizzy Forum

http://www.syfyportal.com/news423903.html

Yes, the Dark Knight (the sequel to Batman Begins) will have two villains: The Joker and Two-Face.

SyFyPortal wrote:The first excursion saw The Caped Crusader go head-to-head with Scarecrow and a secretive cabal intent on re-shaping the world. And now, not one but two villain favorites from the past will come back in the sequel.

Aaron Eckhart, who will take on the one-time Tommy Lee Jones role of Harvey Dent, confirmed to Dark Horizons that he also has taken on the role of the insidious villain from the comic series. And how is the baddie shaping up?

Why?
Why do they constantly do this? Why everyone automatically think "2 are better than 1"? Why? Why? Why?

Oh well, I suppose it will sell more toys (even though from the look of the Joker, I don't see this as being a family friendly film).

Quality is better than quantity when it comes to villians.

Maybe Dent will be built up and Two-Face will be saved for the 3rd film?

2099net wrote:Why?
Why do they constantly do this? Why everyone automatically think "2 are better than 1"? Why? Why? Why?

Um...? Batman Begins: Rahs Al Gul, Falcony, Scarecrow, and a cameo by that murderer dude. Need I say more?

Yes. And as a result the Scarecrow was a shadow of what he should have been.

If you had the Scarecrow in a movie, it should have really examined Bruce's fears and angst. Even the animated series did this better

Well, different strokes. I thought the Scarecrow was awesome and so did the crowd that came along. And I don't know what you mean by examining Bruce's fears and angst. I thought that was the whole point of Begins.

Well, this is getting off-topic and I've discussed this before, but we didn't really see much did we? Parents being killed? Check. Falling down a hole? Check. That was about it?

We should have seen more about Bruce not thinking he was living up to his parents' standards, fearing about letting the citizens of Gotham down, like he felt he let his parents down, visions of Gotham destroyed and in flames. They're Bruces real fears.

Plus, Scarecrow didn't exactly do much did he, and he just sort of disappeared at the end, he was so (un)important.

My point is, I don't think a single film can do justice to two villains. Especially when one is the Joker, and let's face it, Two-Face is similar to the Joker in the first place too.

2099net wrote:Oh well, I suppose it will sell more toys (even though from the look of the Joker, I don't see this as being a family friendly film).

Well, I mean, "Batman Begins" certainly wasn't "family friendly" and designed to sell lots of toys, though it had villains up the wazoo, as was already pointed out. Crap, "Batman Returns" had two villains (and pulled it off pretty well) and the marketing execs make the stupid mistake of promoting it with Happy Meals. Amounts of villains don't help sell toys, goofy bright colors, dumb humor, and non-threatening baddies help sell toys, as "Batman Forever" proved.

I can see this working, especially if Two-Face only shows up for the most part in the third movie, with this one mostly focusing on Harvey's relationship with Bruce, something "Batman Forever" pretty much ignored. I wouldn't even mind that much if they did meet up, as long as it's not going to be the Joel Schumacher way (one villain who just started out seeks out the established one, they plot to kill Batman, yadda yadda yadda).

2099net wrote:We should have seen more about Bruce not thinking he was living up to his parents' standards, fearing about letting the citizens of Gotham down, like he felt he let his parents down, visions of Gotham destroyed and in flames. They're Bruces real fears.

That WAS in the movie. Bruce telling Alfred that his house wasn't his to own, that it's his father's (aka he could never live up to his parents, just done more subtely). We saw his disappointment when his house burnt down and his thinking it was all for nothing, that he failed, meaning that he thinks he disappointed the people who trusted him. And Gotham really was destroyed, no need for visions.

The villians were all added nicely to compliment our hero's journey, not just to outshine him or to be what the comics describe them. The writers made it that each villian got to be a bit of his iconic self without stealing the show from who this is all about. That would be Bruce. That's something I can't say for any other Batman movie, since the villians clearly got the large end of the stick in the previous franchise. Maybe you were just disappointed, I don't know, but I fail to see how any of the above statements rings true.

EDIT: Oh, and from what I recall, Nolan clearly stated that the WB learnt their lessons from the previous outings and that, for the most part, they gave him complete creative freedom so I doubt this is just pencil pushers trying to sell more happy-meals.

2099net when does the movie come out? And did the makers of this movie learn nothing from Spiderman 3? One villain is enough.

I was under the impression that Two-Face wouldn't appear until the end of the film, opening the doors for a third film, and that Aaron Eckhart would simply be Harvey Dent for the majority of The Dark Knight. That article doesn't seem to contradict that notion to me. Until it's confirmed how much screentime Two-Face will have, I will continue to believe that the main villains will be The Joker and Salvatore Maroni.

For me I just hope the actors in this film do better than the previous ones. I can't really see Aaron Eckhart doing any worse than Tommy Lee Jones did Who's playing The Joker? I remember hearing about it but the name escapes me, god I hope it's not Jim Carrey he was awful as Riddler

Chernabog_Rocks wrote:Who's playing The Joker? I remember hearing about it but the name escapes me, god I hope it's not Jim Carrey he was awful as Riddler

Heath Ledger's playing the Joker. The first official pic of him (though it doesn't give you the best idea due to the extreme closeup and all the shadows) is here: http://afrael.loquesea.org/wp-content/u ... _joker.jpg

Chernabog_Rocks wrote:Who's playing The Joker? I remember hearing about it but the name escapes me, god I hope it's not Jim Carrey he was awful as Riddler

Heath Ledger, of Brokeback Mountain and Knight's Tale fame. I personally can't wait to see what he does with the role. From what Nolan's told us about the character, this won't be the goofy, family-friendly Joker we were shown in Burton's version, but a much darker, more muderous Joker.

On a personal note, I consider BB the best comic book film ever, just ahead of the Christopher Reeves Superman, Spidey 2 and V For Vendetta. I honestly couldn't care less if Halle Berry's Catwoman made an appearance, I can't wait for this film.

Cheers,
JM

Disneykid wrote:I was under the impression that Two-Face wouldn't appear until the end of the film, opening the doors for a third film, and that Aaron Eckhart would simply be Harvey Dent for the majority of The Dark Knight.

That was my assumption as well. I'm really hoping it'll just concentrate on the Joker storyline while leaving the door open for Two-Face.

Two-Face was never really my favorite Batman villian. However, I do think it was a brilliant choice to cast Aaron Eckhart. Heath Ledger as the Joker and Maggie Gyllenhaal as Rachel not so much (although Gyllenhaal couldn't possibly be much worse than Katie Holmes was ). Either way, really looking forward to the film next summer!

That should be interesting to see how Heath portrays the Joker. That picture was kind of creepy

Christopher Nolan has a ridiculously excellent track record. I have 100% faith in him doing Batman justice again.

Flanger-Hanger wrote:2099net when does the movie come out? And did the makers of this movie learn nothing from Spiderman 3? One villain is enough.

Spiderman 3's issues were far worse than just an overdose of villians and everybody knows it.

Disney-Fan wrote:

Flanger-Hanger wrote:2099net when does the movie come out? And did the makers of this movie learn nothing from Spiderman 3? One villain is enough.

Spiderman 3's issues were far worse than just an overdose of villians and everybody knows it.

Too right. As long as "the Dark Knight" has half a script, it's already a better movie than "Spider-Man 3".

DisneyKid wrote:I was under the impression that Two-Face wouldn't appear until the end of the film, opening the doors for a third film, and that Aaron Eckhart would simply be Harvey Dent for the majority of The Dark Knight. That article doesn't seem to contradict that notion to me.

So why have him in make-up at all? Ah yes, the other current fad in movie series - end on a "to be continued..." cliffhanger so that the audience feels somehow cheapened at not getting proper closure on the film they've paid to see. If Two Face isn't going to be the villain until the 3rd movie, then there's no reason what-so-ever to have his "origin" in this movie.

Disney-Fan - I've had this discussion before, and heated words have been said - principally with Loomis, when we were discussing the look of the new Joker together.

I'll put it another way then. If you were describing the Scarecrow, based on just what was seen in the movie and nothing else, what could you actually describe? How deep did it go? Did you feel as though you knew the Scarecrow and what made him tick?

The Scarecrow first appeared in the 1940s. And he's survived until now. And the reason he's survived is because like a lot of Batman's iconic villains he has a striking visual with a semi-tragic backstory. Of which Batman Begins did nothing to explore, update or retell.

As somebody who was eagerly awaiting a movie Scarecrow, it just left me very disappointed, and I feel the potential of the character wasn't even scratched.

I know I'm in a minority, but its how I feel. No doubt a film just with Batman and The Scarecrow would have explored the character, his methods and his motivations a lot more.

2099net wrote:So why have him in make-up at all? Ah yes, the other current fad in movie series - end on a "to be continued..." cliffhanger so that the audience feels somehow cheapened at not getting proper closure on the film they've paid to see. If Two Face isn't going to be the villain until the 3rd movie, then there's no reason what-so-ever to have his "origin" in this movie.

There's at least a precedent for it. Harvey Dent was in the 1989 <i>Batman</i>, two films before the debut of Two-Face in that series.

I agree with you, though, about the role of the Scarecrow in <i>Batman Begins</i>. I thought what we saw of him was excellent but the character was shafted. He wasn't explained and he disappeared before he had enough time to fully "enroll" in the narrative. Don't get me wrong, I loved <i>Batman Begins</i>, but there was too much conflict going on and none of it was explored in enough depth. I don't know why they couldn't just step up and say "Okay, Scarecrow's our villain in this movie, and we're going to go with that."

-Aaron