The Dark Knight (spoiler warning)

[Canalien]

Right... I've been holding off this thread for a bit but it came out today so I figure it's finally safe to talk about it...

I've seen the Dark Knight twice in the past few days and apart from being really good, I was bothered by something...

WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED TO THE JOKER?

Seriously, the first time I saw it I thought I missed something. He's hanging off the building, Batman leaves, the SWAT team shows up and presumably arrests him (but you don't even see that) and then... nothing. No other info for the rest of the film. Two-Face gets massive closure (with the funeral and all) and the film ends with a huge build up to another sequel... except that it's going to have to be without the Joker, right?

I know they replaced Katie Holmes with Maggie Gyllenhaal, but then they killed off the character anyways... but I can't see how they're going to replace Heath Ledger as the joker... not after THAT performance (holy shit btw... lived up the hype). The thing that gets me is that they were totally finished with shooting the film long before Ledger died (he'd already started shooting a new film and there's interview footage of him talking about how it was all done and finished with)... so even if they DID plan on putting Ledger as the Joker into the next film.. what the fuck was up with this one? You don't see him die, you don't even actually see him get arrested, there's no reference to him going to jail or Arkham, not even a suggestion that he somehow got away! He obviously can't be in the next one, but it's like they didn't even bother to tie up the Joker story line just in the context of THIS movie... It was like there was 5 minutes of the film missing (and there wasn't... I watched 2 different prints, one of which I made up personally).

Am I the only one who thinks they left some REALLY loose threads whether Ledger was alive or not? There was no closure on the Joker at all, he just disappears from the film in the last 5 minutes. It's like in the next one they'll either replace him (surely not), make up some excuse for his total absence (oh by the way, he's in jail, he won't be a problem anymore) or just totally not mention him at all (weak)...

oh yeah.. Scarecrow being reduced to a drug dealer, showing up for one scene and then taking no further part or being mentioned for the rest of the movie in any way was a little disappointing too... not sure why they did that... coulda worked him into the story line in a minor way or just not put him in at all.

apart from that and Bale's batman voice getting a little annoying after a while... I didn't see very much else wrong with it.

[Up_All_Night]

Ok, scarecrow, i was expecting there to be more, but I think it was just there as Batman wrapping up loose threads from the last film.

The film really ended leading in to the next film. Damn if i know what they'll do with that. With ledger, he's caught and the swat team come up to him. Obviously his plans failed and he's taken into custody. As the film ends with out final scenes wrapping it all up with "all is now well in gotham". One can assume, they may have wanted the joker to be in the next. However with no ledger, they won't replace him, and it'll be just taken as he's gone, off the streets.

Having him caught, and the swat team, it's no great leap or plot hole to assume he was then caught. Did you expect a trail? See him wheeled in to the asylum?
I didn't see this as a loose thread with this. I think it's just more of a shame how we won't see him again.

[Thyrd]

WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED TO THE JOKER?

Seriously, the first time I saw it I thought I missed something. He's hanging off the building, Batman leaves, the SWAT team shows up and presumably arrests him (but you don't even see that) and then... nothing.

This is really standard fare for the Joker. He gets arrested and thrown in arkham asylum then breaks out, or escapes Batman somehow after his defeat. There's never actually any real closure with him.

Observe:
http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/19/27179218qp0.jpg
http://img390.imageshack.us/img390/4875/35052975mj8.jpg

[Canalien]

ah but see that... just that one line right there 'any point in hoping they found his body in the street?' and 'he won't be hurting anyone else for a long time'

there wasn't even that... there was a close up of his face hanging upside down about to be caught and that was it. not a mention.

[Snazz]

I'm guessing him dying might have put a crimp in their plans to tie-up his arc cleanly. They might have shot something but needed a re-shoot that couldn't be done, so left it there. I'd rather they left it unresolved than give him a "Poochy" ending.

ps. Was there anything after the credits? (Christ, I hate when movies do that)

[Up_All_Night]

I'm guessing him dying might have put a crimp in their plans to tie-up his arc cleanly.




This will be it.

There was some line in the film about how they'll be fighting each other for ever, pointing to future adventures.

On a side note, did anyone else think it felt like it was a different gotham city to the one in batman begins? The whole monorail system was gone, no big city shots or anything. I thought just for the sake of continuity they would have included this.

Didn't even show wayne tower, and the one they showed was different than the one in the other and not as cool.

[Canalien]

well... gordon knocked out the monorail at the end of the first one, sending it straight into wayne tower... so i figure they were both goners. makes sense.

i'm still bugged by it a bit... as far as i know ledger finished shooting last september, it's not like 4 months later nolan went 'oh shit, we totally forgot to shoot joker's final scene.. well, we'll just leave it out' what i mean is that even if ledger hadn't died and we all knew he was coming back for the next one, i'd STILL be asking wtf happened to the joker in this one.

maybe there WAS an exit scene for the joker that was filmed but it would have made his appearance in the next sequel explicit, which subsequently became an impossibility, so they pulled it out after his death (or they got all PC and there was a scene in which joker actually carked it but they didn't want to show ledger actually dying on screen or some bullshit)

but they should have replaced it with something to cover that hole. even just a reference from gordon or wayne as to his fate... wouldn't be Poochified.

btw... nothing after credits.

[Up_All_Night]

Gordon only knocked down the final bit, so maybe the removed the entire public transport network. I wonder if it was a case of, for budget reasons, if it's not needed, leave it out. But there was just more of a sense of a giant city. But thats just pointless nit picking.

With the jokers end, i think it's properly just up to the viewer. I took it as, he was defeated, didn't need to see him wheeled off in a straight jacket. The movie really ended after batman took the fall for the two face and drove away in to the darkness. No major conclusion. Then just had the final memorial service to punctuate the whole Harvey dent story.

I don't see why they couldn't just blame the two face stuff on the joker or his people and had to pin it on batman.

Also was two face really dead? I was expecting there to at least be a hint he might not be. Such a waste also if they won't have him back again in some capacity. Although with all things they can always cover it up, with a line, "harvey dent was dead, but the man he became was locked up at arkem" but those things are always lame.

I do fully see them of having intended the joker in the next film though.