[Article]Harvey Dent is Deader than Hell.

[Vehrec]

http://www.toplessrobot.com/2008/09/har ... n_hell.php

So all you fanboys who believe that Harvey Dent/Two-Face could be alive after watching the end of The Dark Knight, when Dent is clearly dead, the characters acknowledge him as dead, and there are no cinematic clues implying he might be anything otherwise than dead—can hush. Even Aaron Eckhart says so. From a joint interview with ComingSoon.net and SuperheroHype:

CS/SHH!: Is Harvey Dent alive?
Aaron Eckhart: No. He is dead as a door nail.

CS/SHH!: So he's not coming back?
Eckhart: He ain't coming back baby!

CS/SHH!: I was hoping he would.
Eckhart: No. I asked Chris [Nolan] that question and he goes, "You're dead" before I could even get the question out of my mouth. "Hey Chris, am I?" "You're dead!" Alright, cool

.

Eckhart goes on to say that the Joker was planned to be part of the third movie, but Heath Ledger's death screwed all that up. So probably no Joker, and definitely no Two-Face. Because he's dead. DEAD. DEEEAAAAAAADDD.

Well Now he's Dead, you wacked him on the head! There it is folks, straight from the horse's mouth, he's dead and he ain't coming back. Closed casket funeral. Also very sad to see that the Joker had a planned role that will now in all likelihood fall through.

[JME2]

Also very sad to see that the Joker had a planned role that will now in all likelihood fall through.

Well, they can always name-drop him, say he's still locked up in Arkham, delighting at the continuing damage he's inflicted on Gotham.

[Jim Raynor]

Unlike a lot of other people, I never saw Harvey Dent's death in TDK as very ambiguous. He fell off a building, hit the ground, laid there motionless while Batman and Gordon talked about him, and got a funeral. It was a little odd that they didn't just openly say "he's dead," and the rumors that Two Face was going to be the main villain in the third movie added to the confusion. However, I would say I was about 80% sure he was dead after seeing the movie.

Now, Nolan and the others will have to work hard to come up with a villain who won't seem anti-climatic after the first two movies. They've already used up Batman's top tier enemies: Ra's Al Ghul operates on the largest scale, the Joker is the most frightening and Batman's polar opposite, and Two Face is the most tragic. The next villain not only needs to have gravitas in the story, but be enough threat to provide the big action scenes that a blockbuster movie demands.

I think Talia and a returning League of Shadows is an underrated choice that people haven't been talking about enough. It was a huge plot hole for the League to just disappear while Batman concerned himself with mere mobsters. They could threaten the city enough that people would start turning to Batman again, giving him a chance at redemption. Throw in a more famous Batman villain like Catwoman for commercial reasons. I like the idea of using Catwoman (though not folded into Talia as was suggested in another thread here). She's a lighter character who Batman can actually redeem by the movie's end. That would allow the trilogy to go out on a positive note, and give closure to Batman by making it seem like he's actually accomplished something. After TDK, I just don't think the third movie can afford to end tragically once again.

[Ghost Rider]

One hand I am disappointed because Two Face was used so little, then tossed aside. The amount of build up and then have "Me AM ANRGY!!!" was meh. But I can see why and the need for it.

As for the next, I am hoping they do a remake of either one of the more classic, and make it the ONLY villain. Dark Knight was Joker's with Two Face being a third string add-on. Problem is that's pretty much it except Catwoman and maybe Riddler.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Well, they can always name-drop him, say he's still locked up in Arkham, delighting at the continuing damage he's inflicted on Gotham.

In fact given the greater realism of the new Batman run having him pop back up again wouldn't make sense. The revolving door at Arkham is a recurring joke in comic book Batman, but in a more sensible world someone as dangerous as the Joker would be locked down so tight he couldn't even turn around. Especially after his daring escape from the police station in TDK.

[The Yosemite Bear]

Well, they can always name-drop him, say he's still locked up in Arkham, delighting at the continuing damage he's inflicted on Gotham.

In fact given the greater realism of the new Batman run having him pop back up again wouldn't make sense. The revolving door at Arkham is a recurring joke in comic book Batman, but in a more sensible world someone as dangerous as the Joker would be locked down so tight he couldn't even turn around. Especially after his daring escape from the police station in TDK.

in a more realistic world, the joker would be more restrained then Hanibal Lector and Il Duce put together, I'm talking werewolf from Underworld II restrained. Failing that lethal injection/electrocution, opps he slipped and fell on a box of bullets curtesy of all the cops he's killed.

[Superman]

He looked dead to me at the end of the movie...

[Molyneux]

Oh, well...
Maybe he'll make a cameo in the Deadman movie?

[UCBooties]

I'm honestly hoping that Ra's Al Ghul makes a comeback in the third movie. I know it would need to be done with great care but he always comes back! After reading that the whole thing was planned as a trilogy, I would be very suprised if there wasn't at least some earnest discussion of his return in the third film, even if it was discarded as being too against the realism which they have built the series on.

[General Zod]

I'm honestly hoping that Ra's Al Ghul makes a comeback in the third movie. I know it would need to be done with great care but he always comes back! After reading that the whole thing was planned as a trilogy, I would be very suprised if there wasn't at least some earnest discussion of his return in the third film, even if it was discarded as being too against the realism which they have built the series on.

It's not as if they can just write out entire bits of canon without pissing off the fanbase. I could easily see the Lazarus pits being written in in some form or another as a plot point for the third film.

[The Cooler King]

Odd. I figured he was dead when I saw the movie, but my friends kept saying he MIGHT be alive, that his death was anticlimactic.

In any case, I read an articlementioning Emma Thomas (Nolan's wife, and the producer of the movie), and supposedly she said that Dent's fate was deliberately left vague:

Why not just recast the Joker and bring back Two-Face, you ask? With Heath Ledger dead and his portrayal of the Joker now indelibly etched into filmgoers' minds, we think it highly unlikely that the filmmakers would recast the role to bring the Clown Prince back. It would also be tough for that character to top what he did to Batman and Gotham in TDK so perhaps once is enough. Likewise, the ending of TDK seemed to suggest that Harvey Dent/Two-Face was dead, although producer Emma Thomas told IGN after an early press screening that Dent's last scene was ambiguous enough to suggest that perhaps he was still alive.

Of course, this article was written less than a week after the movie came out. Now, it seems they've decided to move on and just leave the character dead. I admit, I'm a little disappointed that we won't see more of Two-Face, but what the hell. If that was his swan song, it was a damn good one, and I'm ready for whatever Nolan and crew cook up next.

[Anguirus]

Oh well. I totally concede this. I couldn't help but think there was a reason they were so very coy...after all, it's Two-Face, he had serious recurring villainy potential.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Seriously, a guy with half his face missing as a recurring character? Yeah, that'd work.

Maybe if he lived past the end of TDK, he could have been on screen displaying terminal signs of necrosis. Sorry, but anyone who thinks Two-Face could have come back for more is obviously forgetting that real-life says "No" to people who have half their bloody face missing and refuse treatment. He was more than well done as a character, and I actually found the rise and fall of Harvey to be far more interesting than a focus more on another freak becoming a gangster.

[Jim Raynor]

Beyond the excruciating pain and disease that comes with missing half his face, I just don't think Two Face would work as a recurring villain in a serious and pseudo-realistic series like Nolan's Batman.

Harvey Dent was a crusading DA, how is he supposed to become a mobster without it looking stupid and contrived? Who would follow him? Joker may have treated the mob like shit, but it was at least clear from the start that he was on the wrong side of the law just like they were.

And what does Two Face bring to the table as a villain? His distinguishing traits are a heavily damaged face and a psychological need to flip a coin on every important decision he makes. Both weaknesses. There are only so many times he could flip a coin before it starts looking repetitive and stupid. The character works because he's tragic, not because he's a particularly formidable adversary for Batman. I think Nolan got it right by giving Harvey Dent a complete (if compressed) arc within TDK, killing him off early while they could still treat him as a tragic fallen hero.

[Anguirus]

If the Nolan-verse can handle the Magical Microwave Emitter, it can handle Two-Face finding some way to avoid terminal infection.

In the Long Halloween storyline that Nolan has thus far heavily borrowed from, Two-Face becomes a rallying figure for the freaks, not the gangsters. His enmity with Batman (and in this version, Gordon) also gives him motivation. He's fucking unpredictable (not just because of the coin, he has come up with some truly twisted plans), and therefore spooky.

If he's dead, he's dead. I'm fine with it. But he is one of the better and more popular comic villains, so IMHO there were more stories he could have been used in.

[General Zod]

If the Nolan-verse can handle the Magical Microwave Emitter, it can handle Two-Face finding some way to avoid terminal infection.

Or they could draw in other villains, or even resurrect ones whose deaths were significantly less certain. (ala Ra's Al'Ghul). Re-using Two Face in such a ham-fisted manner when its been fairly well established he's dead as a doornail smacks of writer laziness.

[Admiral Valdemar]

If the Nolan-verse can handle the Magical Microwave Emitter, it can handle Two-Face finding some way to avoid terminal infection.

In the Long Halloween storyline that Nolan has thus far heavily borrowed from, Two-Face becomes a rallying figure for the freaks, not the gangsters. His enmity with Batman (and in this version, Gordon) also gives him motivation. He's fucking unpredictable (not just because of the coin, he has come up with some truly twisted plans), and therefore spooky.

If he's dead, he's dead. I'm fine with it. But he is one of the better and more popular comic villains, so IMHO there were more stories he could have been used in.

So the best way to get over one minor faux pas is to make a big one? No, bringing back Two-Face would suck. Horribly. Comparing a technical issue with some device to a central plot device that was neatly tied up is ludicrous. May as well bring back R'as Al Ghul and have him shout "Surprise, cockfag!" in the opening 30 seconds of any sequel. And then it goes downhill after the gay sex scene with Robin.

And how was R'as' death uncertain? He was locked in a speeding train. Speeding into solid concrete. Then exploding. Ambiguity there is not.

[General Zod]

And how was R'as' death uncertain? He was locked in a speeding train. Speeding into solid concrete. Then exploding. Ambiguity there is not.

We never see a body, leaving some (albeit slim) degree of chance that he had the chance to escape. Given the Lazarus pits are pretty well established, it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to have him survive somehow (as opposed to Harvey).

[Admiral Valdemar]

Sorry, Lazarus Pits in Nolanverse Batman? Would this be in the same film I missed where Superman assists Batman in tracking The Joker too?

Ra's is dead. So is Harvey. Move on, nothing to see here.

[Jim Raynor]

And how was R'as' death uncertain? He was locked in a speeding train. Speeding into solid concrete. Then exploding. Ambiguity there is not.

We never see a body, leaving some (albeit slim) degree of chance that he had the chance to escape.

Ra's closing his eyes in acceptance of his fate as the train flew off the rail sure doesn't suggest that he escaped. Thankfully, the Batman Begins was only based on a comic, and not an actual comic itself. The "never see a body" rule is retarded.

[Anguirus]

Look, I'm a big fan of the Nolan Batman and I want him to decide what happens with the franchise.

But the microwave emitter raped physics with a fucking chainsaw.

Batman has always, always, always been a fantasy franchise. If Nolan moves on, another (good) director takes up the reins, and brings back Ra's (or introduces Robin, or whatever the hell else would piss you off) and does it well, I'm ok with that.

(C'mon, Ra's entire schtick is immortality. That's the reason why the never-see-a-body rule is being invoked, its not coming out of a vacuum!)

[Admiral Valdemar]

Look, I'm a big fan of the Nolan Batman and I want him to decide what happens with the franchise.

But the microwave emitter raped physics with a fucking chainsaw.

It's hardly that bad. It served the story as an appropriate plot device since putting hallucinogens in the water would get noticed damn quickly. I'm no more put off by this than I am superhuman endurance in any film with decent action in.

Batman has always, always, always been a fantasy franchise. If Nolan moves on, another (good) director takes up the reins, and brings back Ra's (or introduces Robin, or whatever the hell else would piss you off) and does it well, I'm ok with that.

(C'mon, Ra's entire schtick is immortality. That's the reason why the never-see-a-body rule is being invoked, its not coming out of a vacuum!)

This isn't fantasy. It isn't the comics or the animated series. It's akin to the detective film noir setting of the original comics, before the overboard stuff crept in. It's not going to change, and I sleep a little more soundly knowing that. We've had rumours of Catwoman, Cher as Catwoman at that. It almost makes me want Robin instead. Sure, DC can hand the reins over to another director if they suddenly see a cash cow. I'm more than certain Schumacher has other nuggets of entertainment up his sleeves.

[Mayabird]

I only saw the first movie once so maybe I'm confused, but I thought when that guy said that Ra's Al Ghul is "immortal" he implied that when the leader dies, the next guy in line becomes Ra's Al Ghul. The guy on the throne in the secret training chambers was the previous Ra's and now whatshisface had become the new one. Now that he's dead, someone else takes up the mantle. If this was the case you could certainly bring back Ra's, though he'd be a different person.

[Jim Raynor]

In that scene Bruce tells Liam Neeson's character that he used "cheap parlor tricks" to conceal his identity, before calling him Ra's. Ra's, now in the open, comments about how they both have dual identities. The Ken Watanabe character was just a decoy; Liam Neeson was Ra's Al Ghul all along.

Within the movie, Ra's talking about being "immortal" and using "supernatural" methods was just him playing with Bruce. It was an Easter Egg reference to the character's Lazarus Pits from the comics, probably the closest the Nolan movies will get to touching the outright fantasy elements of the DC universe.

[Anguirus]

Sorry for the confusion. The "immortal" Ra's is a DC comic universe character. Liam Neeson Ra's is dead unless Nolan or some other guy decides differently.

We've had rumours of Catwoman, Cher as Catwoman at that.

Red Herring.

Sure, DC can hand the reins over to another director if they suddenly see a cash cow.

Probably inevitable.

I'm more than certain Schumacher has other nuggets of entertainment up his sleeves.

Red Herring.

Exploring the idea of a director that isn't Christopher Nolan in the current Bat-franchise means I want to see Batman & Robin, apparently. Awesome logic.