*SPOILERS* The Dark Knight *SPOILERS*

[AnnIQ Edison]

I would like to point out one thing to Maxx before i leave this argument and that is that people hoped that Ledger wouldn't get the Joker role because they thought he would be a horrible casting and would show off a weak Joker. Now they come back after TDK and are praising him for an Oscar nomination.

Also, a small hint like Mr. Reese that only fan boys will get? Did you see the viral marketing that happened for this movie? I have friends that didn't even know that stuff had existed. Maybe that hint was aimed at the fan boys to get them hyped up once again for the next movie.

So don't end up eating your words Maxx. While I agree that a small easter egg like Mr. Reese is a long shot I wouldn't throw myself into the deep end with accusations.

[Maxx]

I'm not the one throwing myself into the deep end, I'm staying grounded and presenting facts we know. Everyone else is diving off and running with a bunch of casting rumors they can't back up. Burden of proof is on people trying to prove what will be, not what is. The burden of proof for such things I would and gladly do. People might not have wanted Heath Ledger but he was a big name actor, thats my point. Who's the least known actor associated with this sereis? Arguably it was Christian Bale, and that stopped being the case after Begins. So my point was that the series casting history was yet another reason why having Josh Harto as the main villian for the next film makes no sense, especially with how well TDK has done, plenty of A-Listers will want to be involved.

You bring up the viral marketing, which is yet another reason why Coleman Reese will not turn into The Riddler if you're going by that, as the name "Edward Nashton" was been dropped in the marketing.

I never said Harto would make a terrible villian, I said its asinine, given what we known about the series history, that Warner would hand over the role of the main villian in the sequel to one of the highest grossing films of all time to him. Yeah Christopher Reeve had never been in anything before Superman, but Gene Hackman was certainly a known actor. Same thing with Brandon Routh and Kevin Spacey. The villians are rarely unknowns.

Jett from BOF says "Mr. Reese" is bullshit and will result in nothing, and you can pretty much take that as gospel.

Speaking of Jett, he's addressed sequel stuff in this peice: http://www.batman-on-film.com/opinion_batm...ett_8-6-08.html

Edited August 6, 2008 by Maxx

[MalaCloudy Black]

I’d also scratch Two Face off the list as well. For one thing, he’s dead and I don’t think that Nolan’s into zombie films.

Is the ending of TDK ambiguous enough to realistically bring back Two Face? Sorta. But doing so opens up a huge can of worms plot-wise in my opinion. Chris Nolan, David Goyer, and Jonah Nolan’s THE DARK KNIGHT has Two Face dying at the end. I don’t see them “undying” him.

I don't see how it opens up a can of worms plotwise at all. It could easily be explained that they assumed him dead and for the sake of the "White Knight" image had him 'die' a hero. He could've woken up and escaped during the scene with the police chasing Batman and the police just chose to keep it under wraps for, like I said, the sake of the "White Knight" image.

Harvey Dent, for all intents and purposes, is dead. Two-Face I'm not sold on.

I'm just holding out a little bit of hope because Two-Face seemed so rushed in TDK

Edited August 6, 2008 by Cloudy No More

[JairusCain]

Yeah the way I interpreted the ending of The Dark Knight... they never checked Gordon's vitals when he was shot... and he came back near the end of the movie. No one ever checked Harvey's vitals either, nor did they ever say he was dead right then and there. They went on a spiel about the people needing to never find out about what he had done, so they told the city he was dead... the likely scenario is that Two Face was apprehended and sent to Arkham. I wouldn't be surprised, nor disappointed, if Two Face was brought back in the next installment via escaping Arkham to wreak havoc on Gotham.

And on the note of being brought back in the next installment... the first time I saw Dark Knight, I was firmly against the idea of Ledger being replaced as The Joker. However, after seeing it a second time, and realizing how much more I preferred it to Batman Begins, I would actually LIKE to see Ledger replaced because there is WAAAAAY too much story left for The Joker for the character to be dropped completely. If someone can take Ledger's performance from The Dark Knight, mimic it and AT LEAST live up to it, I'm all for someone else playing the role. I could honestly see Johnny Depp pulling it off, I mean, after all, his entire performance in POTC was him mimicking Keith Richards. After seeing The Number 23, I also think Jim Carey could easily pull off The Joker character. I just think it would be a shame to not continue his story. I know many may find it in poor taste to replace Heath, but if the performer can pull it off well, it could very well be a tribute to Heath rather than a disgrace.

[Maxx]

Jim Carrey doesn't get to be in Batman movies after his portrayal of homosexual Riddler in Forever. I watched it the other day, its the first potrayal of a gay supervillian in cinema history.

Edited August 7, 2008 by Maxx

[Mike Ockizitchy]

I'd say Jim Carrey could do it, but I'd be hesitant. He might be two Jim Carrey-esque if you know what I mean. I wish we could see Carrey get another shot at a villian though as I think as an actor he's come a bit of a way, it's just the Joker is to important of a role to see if he could do better. Depp could do it for sure, hes an amazing actor. I'd rather they stick with the line of method actors they've been hiring, it's been quite a success so far.

[HeartlineTwist]

I'm sure it's been mentioned, but has anyone considered that Mr. Reese is hinting at the Riddler without that character actually meant to become the Riddler? That could change things.

[Summers]

Best film ever. Jesus. I can't explain how much I love it.

Don't re-cast the Joker! It isn't needed. Sure, the story isn't over between them two, but Nolan only wants one more film - so, it isn't needed. Two Face is likely alive - tell the city Harvey Dent died a hero, and lock up Two Face, simple.

Can't wait for the final piece of the trilogy.

[Maxx]

I'm sure it's been mentioned, but has anyone considered that Mr. Reese is hinting at the Riddler without that character actually meant to become the Riddler? That could change things.

Or it could just be a guy with the last name of Reese...

Just kidding thats completely unbelievable.

[MalaCloudy Black]

Warner Bros. hints that "The Dark Knight" could be the first release on Blu-ray to feature BD-Live.

As we reported in early July Warner has been reluctant to use BD-Live on their Blu-ray releases.

"The Dark Knight" could be the first title to change this. With the enormous success of the movie Warner will no doubt make something special out of its DVD and Blu-ray releases and it could make the studio go for BD-Live. According to HCC Magazine the studio has hinted that a group of people will be able to start the movie simultaneously allowing for chat under and after the movie. Other possible features include library access and more.

"The Dark Knight" will most likely be released on DVD and Blu-ray this November or December.

More on what could be the most anticipated home video release of the year (Unless Star Wars arrives on Blu-ray of course. No, it has not been announced.) when we have it!

http://www.dvdtown.com/news/the-dark-knigh...e-features/5786

[JairusCain]

I'm a little out of the loop on this because I don't pay attention and refuse to spend $30 on Blu Ray discs when DVDs are usually less than $20.... but what the hell is BD Live?

[Kaney]

As far as I'm aware, it means watching the dvd, you can pause it and access web-sites and/or bonus content related to the film without ever leaving the movie.

[Benji]

As far as I'm aware, it means watching the dvd, you can pause it and access web-sites and/or bonus content related to the film without ever leaving the movie.

So... I can sit at my computer whilst watching a movie and talking about it... like I'm doing right now... how innovative

[Summers]

Yeah, I'm not convinced this is any great thing.

[Kaney]

It does seem a bit redundant downloading a trailer for the film you're already watching on dvd, but hey, thats show business or something.

[Benji]

Yeah, I'm not convinced this is any great thing.

Until videos feed me popcorn whilst massaging my feet and pouring coke after coke, it will never be any great thing.

[cmb211087]

Its actually where you can invite loads of people to watch it with you (over a connection) and talk about it etc before and after the fim, like xbox live basically. Don't see the point really

[JairusCain]

Yay... they are further eliminating the point of SOCIAL INTERACTION in the real world. Christ... Fuck technology sometimes, seriously. Our grandkids, will grow up only having communication with other people via video games and stuff like this. Ridiculous.

[Benji]

Yay... they are further eliminating the point of SOCIAL INTERACTION in the real world. Christ... Fuck technology sometimes, seriously. Our grandkids, will grow up only having communication with other people via video games and stuff like this. Ridiculous.

... or they could just be looking for more ways to deliver interactive enjoyment to a film >_<

[JairusCain]

That's what they are doing... BUT, it will eventually eliminate the purpose of going out to hang out with friends to watch a movie. I mean, why waste the gas when you can watch the movie in your own home and just socialize with your friends via the damn DVD player?

That's exactly where it will lead to. Gas prices are "high" and people will want to stay at home and still be able to enjoy a movie with their friends. This will be their answer. And while it may start out as "not tonight, I can't afford the gas" it will turn into a "i'm too lazy to leave the house to do this when i DONT HAVE TO"

Edited August 8, 2008 by JairusCain