My idea for a third batman movie

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Is there even really an arc? Sure BB set up a sequel, and TDK leaves some options open to explore in a third, but at the end of the day, a third film isn't gonna wrap it up, unless it has Bruce getting killed at the end. The only loose end a third movie can cover is clearing Batman's name. As they are, BB and TDK are both stylistically, and in content, stand alone films in the same continuity.

As for the villains, TDK pretty much wrapped up all of the loose ends for those characters. As long as Batman is alive, and there are still villains they can use or re-create, they are gonna keep making them, with or without Nolan.
 
Not really an arc per se, but more of a character evolution for Bruce/Batman. I would like to see more of the Batman overtaking Bruce's life. Like Alfred walks into the cave and finds Bruce not even taking off the Batman suit anymore, just doing his detective work in the cave with his suit on. Realizing his relationships with people ultimately hurts those he gets close to. Perhaps pushing Gordon away to the point Gordon realizes the Batman's "loosing it". These are themes that TDK leaves wide open as far as I'm concerned and want the focus of the 3rd film to go back to Bruce/Batman's psychological difficulties of keeping his personalities seperate, Batman overtaking who Bruce Wayne really is.
 
Riddler was never one of my favourite characters personally, would be good to see a take on a character we haven't seen represented on film yet.
 
Nolan would do the Riddler justice. Could work from a very psychological angle. My votes are for Black Mask, The Riddler and Catwoman. Might seem stuffed, But that's how Nolan rolls.
 
More Batman, one villian, finish the arc.
:(a bit more specific please.

Except all the hostages that were on the bus by preventing them being shot by Gordon's MCU when they were dressed as clowns.

Or all the passengers on the boats by stopping the Joker detonating the bombs via his remote link to them.

So while it can be argued out of the major cast there were members he didn't save, he did save a lot of citizens.
OK, i agree, but he did not really save the close ones around him.

How about Coleman Reese? Saved him. Batman saved many people in TDK, just the ones closest to him he could not. That's the tragedy of TDK.
True, true, true

Ok, so maybe he saved SOME people, but not those closest to him, which seemed to be his biggest care.
I'm kinda glad rachel (slut) died, but harvey could have lived to stir terror in a third film.

i kinda disliked the ending
 
Why? Harvey wanted revenge. Thats all he wanted. Not to terrorize Gotham.

I think you falied to understand the film. But whatever.

More Batman means just that. More focus on Bruce and Batman, rather then the villains.
 
Why? Harvey wanted revenge. Thats all he wanted. Not to terrorize Gotham.

I think you falied to understand the film. But whatever.

More Batman means just that. More focus on Bruce and Batman, rather then the villains.

Interesting idea, but i still like the villains.

what i meant, is if harvey lost control, and decided to leave flip his coin for every single gotham citizen. this one lives, and this one dies...etc.
 
But...why? What did Joe Shmoe have to do with his revenge? He really didnt plan on living after he killed Gordon.
 
harvey is dead, period. besides, I believe that the two-face character in Dark Knight was based heavily on the Long Halloween version of two-face. So I don't think that he'll be out terrorizing Gotham in any way. He would, however, terrorize the mob families. But he's dead, so let's move on.

IMO, one of the best villain to make an appearance on the next film would be Harley Quinn. But she should appear as Dr.Harleen Quinzel and only appear as Harley on the last chapter of the movie when she helps Joker to break out of prison (thus making a cliffhanger for another sequel).
The reason is that, since Nolan loves to explore the psychological aspect of the characters, it would be great to play with the Dr.Harleen Quinzel's psyche.

And since the next movie would dwell more on Batman's struggle as a fugitive, I'd say that the story should be able to give Bale more screen time to show what he can do with the Bruce Wayne character and explore more on his conflict about whether he should keep on his crusade or not. And for that, a villain that can play well into the story would be... the Mad Hatter! Though, it wouldn't be interesting to see a midget playing tricks on other people's mind...

Anyway, they should have Catwoman on the next movie!
 
harvey is dead, period. besides, I believe that the two-face character in Dark Knight was based heavily on the Long Halloween version of two-face. So I don't think that he'll be out terrorizing Gotham in any way. He would, however, terrorize the mob families. But he's dead, so let's move on.

IMO, one of the best villain to make an appearance on the next film would be Harley Quinn. But she should appear as Dr.Harleen Quinzel and only appear as Harley on the last chapter of the movie when she helps Joker to break out of prison (thus making a cliffhanger for another sequel).
The reason is that, since Nolan loves to explore the psychological aspect of the characters, it would be great to play with the Dr.Harleen Quinzel's psyche.

And since the next movie would dwell more on Batman's struggle as a fugitive, I'd say that the story should be able to give Bale more screen time to show what he can do with the Bruce Wayne character and explore more on his conflict about whether he should keep on his crusade or not. And for that, a villain that can play well into the story would be... the Mad Hatter! Though, it wouldn't be interesting to see a midget playing tricks on other people's mind...

Anyway, they should have Catwoman on the next movie!

That was my original idea, and SOME PEOPLE can't stand the idea of a new joker, which is the only sane way to have a joker out of an asylum, which is new, and crazier.

But in order to have Harley, you need to have The Joker....and Heath is dead...so....
New Joker...DUH
there are a lot of great actors, so stop being so one track minded, and stuck up, and realize that someone else could play joker. Not just heath.
I agree with some of what u say, but when it comes to creativity, and joker, you really begin to tick me off.
 
it might as well be considered as homage to the actor though. If the next dude to portray Joker can match Ledger's down to his laughter, that is.
 
Casting a new Joker would be the same as pissing on Heath's grave....kinda. It would be insulting.

:bangheadHave you any creativity, or are you simply blinded by the fact that any other actor could play joker as good or even better than ledger did, and he was great.
But he was not the only. Move on, and stop making stupid naive comments like me "pissing on his grave," it simply makes you look utterly arrogant, and simple minded. Look at the big picture. Be f^^^ing creative, please i beg of you think outside of the box, and stop being so stuck up about a ledger replacement. He was great, but as i know i have said before, MOVE ON!!!:banghead

And also, it would not be pissing on heaths grave, it would be more like taking a huge massive sh^t, and isn't that exactly what the joker would love to see happen more than anything else? Me crapping on his grave? Joker would be hysterical at the sight of that. Wake up already, PLEASE.
 
Ooooookay. . .

Anyways, my feeling is that Ledger's Joker was a special performance, and should be left alone. There are many other Bat-villains that can be used, with all kinds of wacky directions that Bruce can go, and Joker doesn't have to be part of the equation. We had a great Joker story. I think Joker dying and being replaced by another Joker would be kind of dumb, also.

C'mon, Clock King!!
 
Ooooookay. . .

Anyways, my feeling is that Ledger's Joker was a special performance, and should be left alone. There are many other Bat-villains that can be used, with all kinds of wacky directions that Bruce can go, and Joker doesn't have to be part of the equation. We had a great Joker story. I think Joker dying and being replaced by another Joker would be kind of dumb, also.

C'mon, Clock King!!

i disagree, he said that they would be together for a while (and till' death do they part).

Also, who is clock king, i dont really know him.
 
Ooooookay. . .

Anyways, my feeling is that Ledger's Joker was a special performance, and should be left alone. There are many other Bat-villains that can be used, with all kinds of wacky directions that Bruce can go, and Joker doesn't have to be part of the equation. We had a great Joker story. I think Joker dying and being replaced by another Joker would be kind of dumb, also.

C'mon, Clock King!!



:clap What he said! :clap
 
:bangheadHave you any creativity, or are you simply blinded by the fact that any other actor could play joker as good or even better than ledger did, and he was great.
But he was not the only. Move on, and stop making stupid naive comments like me "pissing on his grave," it simply makes you look utterly arrogant, and simple minded. Look at the big picture. Be f^^^ing creative, please i beg of you think outside of the box, and stop being so stuck up about a ledger replacement. He was great, but as i know i have said before, MOVE ON!!!:banghead

And also, it would not be pissing on heaths grave, it would be more like taking a huge massive sh^t, and isn't that exactly what the joker would love to see happen more than anything else? Me crapping on his grave? Joker would be hysterical at the sight of that. Wake up already, PLEASE.

Yeah CelticP. Stop being simple-minded and arrogant and insisting on one thing all the time, like how the Joker should return and be played by another actor. Oh, I meant, that he should not return played by another actor...:rolleyes:

Seriously villainsfan, people who live in glass houses and all that...
 
Back
Top