The Harvey Dent Act/Following up TDK's Dent Ending (SPOILERS)

[BatmAngelus]

So let me get this straight...

Batman quit after he killed Two-Face.  Luckily for Gotham, the Mayor passed the Harvey Dent Act to clean up the streets involving...no parole for major criminals?  I know the virals had the full memo from the Mayor, but I'm only going off of the movie script here and the only detail I can recall about it was a line that Blake said.

It was vague to me how this worked for eight years.  I realize that it's "based on a lie" of Harvey Dent, but that doesn't change the fact that the law, whatever it entailed, was clearly effective and the police had cleaned up their act.  Plus it's not like the law would be repealed if the truth about Two-Face were exposed.  Harvey had no role in actually writing the law anyway.

Hell, once the lie is exposed, the only chaos that results comes from Bane, the League of Shadows, and the released Blackgate criminals, not from any Gothamite citizens who felt betrayed or lost hope (and whom Batman and Gordon felt they were protecting at the end of the last movie).

A bigger issue to me was that the truth of Harvey Dent's crimes never went anywhere.  There were barely any ramifications towards Gordon and Batman for having the truth kept from the city all this time, which made me wonder what the point was. 

Bane revealed the truth to Gotham, but why would this terrorist be trusted by the public?  After eight years of believing Dent to be a hero and Batman to be a murderer, people are suddenly going to believe this criminal's word and believe in Batman again when he comes back (to the point that Foley, who was out to take down Batman, takes up arms and fights Bane's army simply after seeing the fire Bat Signal on the bridge)?

Since 2008, I've been wondering how they would show the consequences of Batman and Gordon's decision in The Dark Knight's ending and all it amounts to is Bane reading papers that were conveniently in Gordon's coat when he caught him and Blake criticizing Gordon in a living room.

[Paul (ral)]

Gordon's guilt over the Dent lie is a little hard for me to swallow.

Firstly Gordon is guilty that Batman took the blame for Dent's actions and Dent is made to be a hero.

Regardless of the fact that Dent threatened Gordon's family - Gordon is sure to know that "Two-Face" wasn't Dent due to Dent having a breakdown. Dent was a victim of the Joker pure and simple.

Batman taking the blame does no one any harm - especially since it helps clean up the city. It's not like Batman went to jail for the killings he burdened on himself. In fact it was the best for Batman as he wasn't needed anymore.

I really don't get why Gordon was so cut up about it.

[riddler]

When Bane reads Gordon's cue cards for 'the truth' he releases many of the prisoners in a much more dramatic fashion to what would have potentially happened anyhow.

If it were public info what Harvey did after the scarring, there's the potential it COULD undermine all the people he had thrown in jail. Now that is of course the official explanation which is kind of weak, Harvey going crazy after Rachel dies and he loses half his face does not undermine anything he did before that.

[BatmAngelus]

When Bane reads Gordon's cue cards for 'the truth' he releases many of the prisoners in a much more dramatic fashion to what would have potentially happened anyhow.

Indeed, which is why the moment felt flat to me, since it was a lot more extreme for Bane to release hundreds of criminals (who care more about being free than whether or not Dent was a bad guy) than to expose the truth to the city.

I didn't know the best place to share this, but I saw this as the signature of a SHH forum poster named Severus_Snape and cracked up:

"All these years, since I first saw the 1989 film, I've wanted to be Batman. Seeing him as a depressed hermit who moped over a woman that ultimately didn't even want him, Batman became me."

[thecolorsblend]

I really don't get why Gordon was so cut up about it.

The most I've got is that a good man's name (Batman) was being marred so that a guilty man's name could remain clean.

And honestly, Nolan did such a poor job of bringing Harvey's split personality across that I'm not at all convinced that Two Face is a distinct persona from Harvey. In TDK, "Two Face" comes off as a victim of the Joker's crimes than as a completely separate psychological entity.

[The Dark Knight]

I really don't get why Gordon was so cut up about it.

The most I've got is that a good man's name (Batman) was being marred so that a guilty man's name could remain clean.

Yep, simple as that really. And we're told in the other film by Gordon that Batman can take it. Time marches forward and opinions change, but I agree with ral in that Gordon being cut up over it so badly is hard to swallow. They won. Peace reigned, criminals - and lets face it, they were bad and the police fought them in the finale, were locked away off the streets. Batman wasn't needed and Batman took this tag on himself. It wasn't put on against his wishes. The only real reason why Gordon is so cut up about it is so Bane can steal the letter he wrote. But even then, it's hardly concrete proof.

[BatmAngelus]

And honestly, Nolan did such a poor job of bringing Harvey's split personality across that I'm not at all convinced that Two Face is a distinct persona from Harvey. In TDK, "Two Face" comes off as a victim of the Joker's crimes than as a completely separate psychological entity.

I really wish Harvey was a character in all three films since his character development perfectly lends itself to a trilogy and would've given them a lot more room to explore his character and make his transformation into Two-Face less rushed.  Using Year One, Long Halloween, and Dark Victory as broad templates, there's Film 1 introducing him as a frustrated ADA who becomes Batman's first ally, Film 2 giving him the DA position and showing his descent over the edge and becoming Two-Face, and Film 3 having him in full Two-Face mode and exploring the ramifications of Batman and Gordon having to fight their former friend/ally.  Instead, we got all of the Harvey Dent story in one movie.

Still, after killing Harvey in TDK, they could've at least done something interesting with the aftermath.  There's a blogger named about_faces who speculated something really cool months before the movie came out.  He believed that the "Harvey Dent Act," revealed in the viral marketing, could have serious ramifications in the story of the movie:

While Harvey was willing to bend the rules, he was never the type to outright support the removal of rights such as parole. It makes you wonder just what else has been taken away in the name of enforcing law and order, especially unrest and protests similar to the Occupy movement seem to be a central part of TDKRises' conflict. If the government and the heroes have "saved" the city through extreme order, then it's no wonder that Bane seems to be rallying together his own army of citizens in response. [...]

If the people in that poster as well as this one indeed are angry Gotham citizens rather than Bane's (or perhaps Ra's, maybe possibly?) own private army, then it looks like the reckoning that Bane represents is the response to the oppressive war on crime that Gordon and Batman have waged in Harvey's name.

And that's when I thought of something which actually gave me chills. If my deductions are correct, then maybe, just maybe, Nolan still has something to say about Harvey after all. If all this is true, then the real legacy of Harvey Dent is a city at war with itself, on the verge of being torn in two.

Holy. Crap.

http://about-faces.livejournal.com/77033.html

Sadly, this was not to be.

[The Dark Knight]

The thing is, with this movie, they had a lot of things they could have done, but they didn't latch onto it. Call it nitpicking, call it not accepting what the movie is, but I can't shake that vibe off. What we received was disappointing and half baked. That concept above for example sounds fantastic. I think Nolan didn't live up to his reputation here. People were expecting something elaborate and intricate from him, but we just didn't get that. People's thoughts on what could've been are above and beyond the finished film IMO. We could have had a really awesome Bruce sneaks back into Gotham sequence - taking out some Bane goons and disguising himself as one. Or something, anything. But alas, nothing. Nolan chose to put more time into Blake instead.

For example, passing the torch to a replacement Batman isn't a new concept and it's rooted in the comics. But that doesn't mean I have to like it. On a really simple level, I wanted to see what people thought about Harvey once the lie was exposed. We get the general idea what they think beforehand  I guess- with Harvey Dent day and such. But nothing after. Which is a shame. Some could hold the view that Dent no longer has their respect. Some few might say the guy died a loser, but it brought out a positive result. And then of course the people attacking the imprisonment without parole. The fact that the movie started eight years after TDK made such ideas ripe for the picking. Because the myth of Dent would've become greater as the years passed, and the truth would've hurt even harder.

[riddler]

The series is over, there is no viable way to do a sequel; commissioner gordon is no more nor is bruce wayne as batman in the Nolanverse.

There's so many plot holes merely in the harvey dent aftermath itself;
-as mentioned him going crazy isn't enough to reverse the previous convictions
-blaming it on Batman basically affirms to his skeptics that batman was a bad guy. The fact that gotham cleans up after batman 'leaves' affirms to the public that every bad thing that happened was batmans fault
-continuing on the above point. Gordon was linked to batman, it was well known he controlled the bat signal (another batman trademark sorely missed in this film) so why had he not been question or blamed for Batmans 'crimes'
-throughout the first two films it was established batman wanted to create a positive symbol and inspire good in others and hopefully have someone aspire to take up his mantle. While the mantle does eventually get taken up by John Blake, any positive inspiration or hope created by Batman got erased with him getting falsely accused of the crimes
-did Bruce Wayne never consider that he could land in prison for murder if he were ever outed as batman? Reese knew it, plenty of that equipment could have been traced to wayne enterprises. There clearly was a trail. If anyone even suspected that they could put the pieces together; batman first shows up when Bruce wayne returns to gotham, batman goes into hiding at the same time bruce wayne does, bruce then comes out from his mansion and mysterious injuries and starts making waves again at the same time Batman returns.

[thecolorsblend]

I really wish Harvey was a character in all three films since his character development perfectly lends itself to a trilogy and would've given them a lot more room to explore his character and make his transformation into Two-Face less rushed.  Using Year One, Long Halloween, and Dark Victory as broad templates, there's Film 1 introducing him as a frustrated ADA who becomes Batman's first ally, Film 2 giving him the DA position and showing his descent over the edge and becoming Two-Face, and Film 3 having him in full Two-Face mode and exploring the ramifications of Batman and Gordon having to fight their former friend/ally.  Instead, we got all of the Harvey Dent story in one movie.

Apparently Goyer's original outline set up Harvey Dent in TDK and his transformation in what became TDKRises. You and I wouldn't be the first to propose that TDK is too busy, too many characters, too many moving pieces on the chessboard, all that. Assuming that rumor (and I swear to think I read the sourced reference from the Wikipedia page but that may not have been it) is true, to me it says that TDK truly was too crowded. I don't think different pacing would've radically improved my enjoyment of these films but it is still interesting to consider how things were originally conceived. I can't help but thinking the original structure would've ultimately been more satisfying.

Besides, there was already a district attorney in Batman Begins. One wonders why the crap he couldn't have been Harvey from day one. But whatever, it's done.