Filed under: Fanboy Frivolity

Who Didn’t Think Harvey Dent was Dead?

Jesus, the Internet is starving for something to talk about

Yes, this story has spoilers, but based on the fact that The Dark Knight has made I am assuming anyone interested has already seen it.

Yesterday Ain’t It Cool News and CHUD reported what they considered news saying Harvey Dent is officially dead at the end of The Dark Knight. Seriously? How is this news or even something people didn’t think was the case?

The snippet you see above is a screencapture from the Dark Knight script. I have made it a point to draw your eye to one word specifically. Gordon and Batman even talk about all the people that are dead at the end of the film. They hold a memorial for Dent at the end of the film. The whole reason for Batman becoming a villain at the end of the film is because Dent is dead. What am I missing? Is there a story here?

Apparently there is… see, see, see, see, see, see, see, see, see, see, see, see and see.

Related post categories: Fanboy Frivolity : ,
Click Here to add an
Avatar to Your Account
Post #1
Gravatar

Dent is dead, but is two-face? Gordon and Batman at the end hold a memorial for Dent and Batman takes on the murders as if he did them to keep the "white knight" image of Dent in Gotham. If they revealed what really happened his memory and work would be for not. Another point, Maroni made a similar fall earlier in the film and only breaks his legs, batman too made the very same fall with Dent and gets up fairly quickly.

I see your point and it is in black & white "dead." But two-face is two personalities, and dent has died, while two-face could have survived. Nolan has been very good about remainig true to Batman and not having batman kill the villains, if he kills them, in his eyes they are just the same. I wouldn’t be surprised if Two-Face slipped away and went down into the sewer, like he did in "the long halloween" which we all know was one of The Dark Knights main sources.

Personally, I dont want Two-Face back anyways, he was the only part of Nolan’s vision that didn’t fit when he became two-face. Alot of Nolan’s batman appeal is the realism of it, and Two-Face felt very cartoony and not realistic like Joker and Scarecrow have.

I think Nolan should play to lesser villains, like Mad Hatter! He would be a rad inclusion into the mobster world of Gotham. Hatter knowing he could never take down Bats on his own enlists the help of Scarecrow and other batman villains, maybe even possibly creating BANE to keep bats at bay while the mob takes back control of Gotham.

- Schofizzy
( September 10th, 2008 | 4:43 pm )
Reply to this comment
Leave Your Feedback
(required)
(will not be shown) (required)
ADVERTISEMENT
This one's strictly for the fans
Damn, that stop-motion animation is impressive
From Best Picture to Original Screenplay...
Another look at the same question with a different approach
Looking for meaning in a fanboy world
HUGE update today... One guess at what Eastwood's next is rated...
This film is going to be a bust or a blast
Creator of 'The O.C.' and 'Gossip Girl' gets mutant gig
'Narnia' scribes pull duty on 'The First Avenger'
The original wasn't even all that good
ADVERTISEMENT
Mickey is easily the front-runner and some more early Oz reviews arrive
Will Cruise ever step out of the shadow he created for himself?
Sounds like its a winner... for the most part
You ever think they are just trying to piss the guy off?
'WALL-E' and 'Tropic Thunder'... a pair of must buys!
Definitely the best new film release of 2008 on home video
It's quite simple, this movie is fantastic
Fan or not, this could be entertaining
'Religulous' is not one of them
It's here, whatcha think?
Will the first review start a trend?
I can't tell if I am excited for this movie or not
The next flick The Rock is cookin'
I just can't remember which Muppet he looks like!
Yup, I somehow came up with ten of them