Yeah it seems like he was just horsing around, but there's probably a little truth in his words.

I never thought about blaming Joker. Just blame Harvey. "Sorry, folks, but the DA went nuts after his fiance was killed and his face got fucked up, and he took matters into his own hands." Sure, Harvey was supposed to be this shining "white knight" that everyone was looking up to, but he's just a public official. He can and will be replaced. Blaming Batman just doesn't make sense, and as far as I'm concerned, allowing him to be blamed defeats the entire purpose of why he became Batman in the first place.

Everyone harps on the fact of why they just can't put the blame on the joker or Harvey. A lot of people picked up on why Batman didn't blame the joker as that would make him as bad as the peopel he fought.

The people of Gotham didn't just see Harvey as their white knight, they saw him as somebody that would stand up to corruption, the mob, crime in general. If the people knew what had actually happened to Harvey, as in he becomes a murdering psychopath, would they be willing to stand up to crime? At the end of the movie he was shown as a martyr or hero for dying to stand up to crime. If the truth was known, people would be afraid to do anything for fear of the consequences.

Batman took the blame so that the people would not be afraid.

At least this is how I saw it.

I am pretty sure he's kidding... if not, then wow. Downey has been in some pretty 'smart' movies that didn't connect with people, so maybe it's just sour grapes...but I'm pretty sure it was all in jest.

That's all a load of B.S. - They could have just blamed the murders on random members of the Joker's "Gang." Who could disprove it? (There were no witnesses.) That keeps Dent's record and reputation clear, and KEEPS Batman as a symbol of justice (albeit vigilante justice).

Kind of the same thing there.

What a sad, helpless little town of sheep Gotham must be. First of all, it's not the people's job to stand up to the kind of crime we're talking about. That's why there's a DA, a police chief, a police department, etc, etc. If the people knew the truth about what happened to Harvey, I think they would understand and would expect him to answer for what he did. And since he died, I would expect them to say good riddance, let's see who we can get to replace him that will do better.

As for the people being afraid...I would think they would be more afraid now that they think Batman is a murderer. They should have been able to say "Thanks, Batman, for taking care of that two-faced Harvey Dent for us. We looked up to him and everything, but we'll elect someone else, and sleep better knowing you're on our side."

BTW...isn't there a better thread we can discuss this? I seem to recall there not really being a shortage of Batman threads.

He "killed" a corrupt cop and two mobsters. Most people would probably be applauding him. As for the "people are sheep" thing... it's not JUST the psychological damage of Harvey's fall... all of his prisoners, every prosecution he's ever persued would be thrown out.


Also, put me in the, "I bet RDJ was just joking around" column.



-Doc

Judging from the way this thread has run off the rails, it looks like you got your wish. :)

And, to further fuel the fanboy fires...

That's exactly right. Wasn't the Joker also in jail when Rachel Dawes was blown up? Are they blaming her death on Batman as well? No, the Joker's gang was simply carrying out his plan. In that sense, the Joker is responsible for Harvey's killing spree, since his actions pushed Harvey over the edge into madness. He even provided him with the gun.

Now, back on topic, in many ways I agree with RDJ. I just don't get why people are calling The Dark Knight such a brilliant piece of filmmaking. Was it a great summer movie? Sure. But I could see the twists coming a mile away, and there were dozens of plot holes in the movie big enough to drive the Joker's truck through.

This is where I become very curious as to what Nolan's original plan was for a third Batman movie had Ledger not died. Assume the Joker was supposed to return(why else would he survive the 2nd film?). Perhaps he'd be on trial or at the very least in policy custody. Maybe that's why Nolan went with the ending he did. Because if Batman and Gordon try to pin Dent's killing spree on the Joker, he'll insist that it was Dent who did it and his "white knight" image amongst the public will be tarnished.

If however Batman takes the fall as he does in The Dark Knight, then the public and most of the Gotham PD(save for Gordon and maybe a few others)just directs its wrath at him and Dent's reputation as a hero remains intact. The Joker's ultimate goal was destroy the spirit of Gotham. To reduce its citizens to his level. Batman and Gordon will do whatever it takes to not let the Joker win. If that means turning Batman into a cop killer, that's how far they're willing to take it.

What bugged me more than anything about the ending(aside from how rushed it felt) was that Gordon said 5 people were killed by Dent, including 2 cops. Who were the 3 additional people killed(or 2 if Maroni bought it when the car flipped over)? Who is the other cop? The one in the hospital? How could they pin that on Dent if the place blew up?

No plan then, no plan now. Nolan felt TDK finished the Batman story he wanted to tell.

Source?

So did Scarecrow. Maybe he's just being true to the comics... with Batman having a strict "no killing" rule, you're going to be left with a lot of bad guys in jail instead of in the morgue when the movies wrap up. I applaud the decision to not have Joker die, even if the character isn't used again in the movies, he clearly lays out their relationship verbatim from the comics: "We're destined to do this forever..."



-Doc

Those of you who are questioning the ending of TDK should read the Maxim article with Frank Miller where he outlines the 10 Superhero Commandments. http://www.maxim.com/articles/index.aspx?key=26997&pg=1

Since a much of the current Batman movies are based his stories it might help see where some of this is coming from. Batman is not a hero in the conventional sense. He is not a role model for kids. He does not do "The More You Know" commercials to keep kids in school. Do doesn't do ribbon cuttings at the youth center.

He does the ugly, nasty stuff that most people aren't comfortable doing to keep the streets safe. He uses fear to keep the criminal element in line. Pegging the murders on him helps with that mythos.

The Joker was able to use his "goodness" against him, knowing that Batman wouldn't blatantly kill him. Now, petty thugs have a reason to fear Batman again.

I have no problem with the dark knight being dark, I just felt that the movie slowed down unnecessarily at the supposedly climax of the movie.

The pacing at the end of the movie seemed off to me as well. But some people seem to have problems with the way Batman took the rap for the murders, and I just tried give some further explanation to that.

Exactly why I dislike TDK...

Let's face it, they needed to make Batman a fugitive for the next movie and they had limited screen time to do it. So they tacked in a couple lines about him taking the blame, and there you go.

They mention in the movie when Harvey takes the ambulence and points the gun at the crazy guy that if Harvey's character is questioned then all his old cases could be up for an appeal.

They mention it a couple of times. That was why batman had to become the villian, it wasn't lazy writing. And I think the reason of why they didn't blame harvey's killings on joker or anyone else is so now everyone thinks batman kills and they're scared of him.

Remember when he has eric roberts and is trying to get him to talk, and roberts won't talk because he know's batman won't kill. Well now they will all talk.

I guess maybe the movie was too complicated for some people, Mr. Downey Jr, ahem.

he's fallen off the wagon.

Newsweek interview. When asked about doing a third movie, Nolan said that he tried to put in everything that he ever wanted to see in a Batman story with The Dark Knight.

I thought that Batman was taking the rap for murdering Dent, as well as the people that Dent killed. We know that a perimeter was being formed around the building and that the cops knew the situation but not who was involved. And by having a closing perimeter, the cops were going to find out who exactly was there: Gorden, Gorden's family, Batman, and a dead Dent. The Joker had already been captured at this point. They couldn't blame it on a thug who mysteriously vanished from the scene of the crime, I mean, hell, even Batman was unable to escape the perimeter without being chased. So how were they going to explain Dent's death, he tripped over his own shoes?

That is why Batman taking the blame makes perfect sense. He is a suspect AT the scene of the crime. He doesn't have an alibi at the time of any of the Dent murders. Any internal investigation would still lead to Batman as being the main suspect, taking out any of the wild cards that would pop up if you blamed it on someone else. By taking the blame, he protects Harvey's reputation.

And for those of you who says its lazy writing, the concept is layered in throughout the whole film. Harvey claiming that he is being Batman is the exact same thing Batman did in the end for Harvey- taking the blame and facing the consequences in order to protect a higher idea.

As for RDJ, I love the guy and his work but could care less what he thinks about TDK.

I agree with you.

We can't overlook the internal motivation of Bruce Wayne either. Until the Joker showed up, Bruce really believed that his days as Batman were going to end shortly. He even mentions this to Rachel. With the Joker finally caught, maintaining Dent's reputation might be the only thing that saves the city in the long run, allowing Bruce to give up what he is doing.

I would think so too. Not the only time he's made a TDK/Iron Man jokes.

http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/06/01/...r-viral-video/

Go to 1:25 for the reference. The whole thing is actually pretty funny.

:lol:

I hadn't seen that before and it cracked me up. Thanks for the link.

"You know what? [Expletive] DC comics. That's all I have to say and that's where I'm really coming from.""

That's pretty clearly a joke.

i'm positive RDJ was joking. it fits with his style of humor. i'm actually a little surprised that anyone thinks he was serious.

and i no longer have the energy or inclination to explain why Batman taking responsibility at the end of the Dark Knight is both the ideal practical solution to the predicament they are in as well as the clearest and most poignant thematic expression of the whole movie. i'm convinced that those who don't see it either just want a reason to dislike the movie, refuse to think it through, or don't understand the Batman character in general.