Your Version of The Dark Knight

[BatmAngelus]

How would you do The Dark Knight?  As usual with the parameters, keep it within the framework of the film and treat Begins as it currently exists.

One thing I'd change is that I wouldn't have had Bruce switching costumes in this movie. 

A lot of fans complained that Bruce would change suits between movies in the Burton/Schumacher series without explanation and praised The Dark Knight for tying the costume change into the plot.  I completely disagree with this for several reasons:

1) I dislike the TDK Batsuit, simply on an aesthetic level, and much prefer the Begins suit.

2) The TDK/TDKR Batsuit makes Bruce more vulnerable, so it's hard to buy that he'd opt for it.  Remember the dialogue in Begins?  "This sucker can stop a knife."  Cut to Dark Knight Rises with Talia...

3) I also don't buy the explanation in the movie.  If Bruce was really having trouble with flexibility with the suit, why'd it take him this long to want an upgrade?  It feels like he would've wanted a change immediately, especially since it seemed to work fine when he was fighting the League of Shadows and Ra's Al Ghul.  Now, he's fighting dogs and amateur vigilantes and it's too much for him?

4) Biggest sin of all, though, is the fact that the costume change does not add anything to the rest of the movie's story, other than eating up screentime.  The sonar abilities and projectile gauntlet scallops could've easily been added to the existing suit.

I'll have bigger things to add later, but I thought I'd start off with that.

[thecolorsblend]

Wouldn't have minded another BS story about how the Joker got the scars.

[The Laughing Fish]

1) I'd have the second film set at least two years after BB. Instead of District Attorney, I'd have Harvey Dent as the Mayor of Gotham City, whose office has made a massive impact on cutting down the corruption and crime throughout the city, in spite of Batman. If Dent was supposed to come across as a JFK kind of figure, then I'd say that this would be more convincing and believable that people would invest their hope in Dent. It would justify Batman's belief that he can retire and let Dent take over his place as a symbol for Gotham to aspire to. Of course, this changes when the Joker emerges, and Batman does all he can protect Dent from being killed.

2) A more coherent and visibly divided public debate over Batman's actions; some arguing he was the one who paved the way for Dent's office to clean up the city while others condemn his recklessness and view him no better than the likes of the Joker. The law is also divided - Gordon commends Batman for saving the city from destruction by the League of Shadows, whereas politicians demand he should be questioned about that night, as well as arguing he should be locked up since no city should ever co-operate with vigilantes, and for the death of Ras Al Ghul. 

3) I'd have Batman feeling guilty for causing Ras Al Ghul's death; taking into account of own his actions to date and does his best to keep damage to a minimum because of the scrutiny made against him. In the end, however, he feels distraught for allowing the Joker to kill too many people, including Rachel, and fears he will escape and kill again. Batman decides to sacrifice his morals once again and let Joker die, but this time, this course of action gives the law an excuse to no longer tolerate his vigilantism, and Batman suddenly finds himself becoming a fugitive.

4) Dent gets scarred, but survives the explosion at the hospital. His proper transformation as Two-Face and vengeful crusade is saved for the third film. I should also mention that I would never let Joker (the guy who was involved in killing Rachel and tried to kill her before, remember?) manipulate Dent into taking his anger out on everyone who betrayed him or let him down.

I could go on with more, but I'm tired and there were ground rules that the original version of BB had to exist.

[johnnygobbs]

Laughing Fish, I don't understand why you'd change Harvey from a DA to a mayor.  He's a DA in the comic-books and it's precisely because he's a DA who poses a legal threat to villains like Maroni in the court room that he's ultimately marked from the get go.  From a criminal justice perspective a mayor would be a much more remote figure and unlike a DA his performance, and thus his prospects for re-election, would depend on a wider range of issues than crime statistics alone.  By contrast, Batman could conceivably invest his faith in DA Dent because as long as the latter produced results by putting men like Maroni behind bars public support would be guaranteed and Batman could then effectively 'retire'.

[Edd Grayson]

Not kill Two-Face at the end and therefore not have Batman become a wanted criminal.

[The Laughing Fish]

Laughing Fish, I don't understand why you'd change Harvey from a DA to a mayor.  He's a DA in the comic-books and it's precisely because he's a DA who poses a legal threat to villains like Maroni in the court room that he's ultimately marked from the get go.  From a criminal justice perspective a mayor would be a much more remote figure and unlike a DA his performance, and thus his prospects for re-election, would depend on a wider range of issues than crime statistics alone.  By contrast, Batman could conceivably invest his faith in DA Dent because as long as the latter produced results by putting men like Maroni behind bars public support would be guaranteed and Batman could then effectively 'retire'.

The only reason I suggested that change is because I never believed in the idea that Dent, as a DA, could become a symbol for Gotham to aspire to, especially not to the point that his own crimes later on had to be covered up. Dent, for all his courage, is still a man whose impact on crime is determined  by the evidence he has to work with to prosecute criminals; after all he had to ask Batman to get Lao back from Hong Kong. That might be good enough to prove some criminals guilty, but not quite good enough if there's a mass murderer running loose and trying to kill you.

In all honesty, I wouldn't suggested changing Dent's role from DA to mayor if the story wasn't trying to make Dent the equivalent to JFK. I never heard of anyone investing their faith in humanity in a lawyer or District Attorney, to the point that their crimes had to be covered up. If it was any other politician, like a President, then that would be more believable. After all, we're constantly told that he's The White Knight and "the best hope that Gotham has in a while", but what exactly did he do to earn such a reputation? If it weren't for Batman bringing Lao back from Hong Kong, would Dent's case against the mob have gotten anywhere?

Besides, I never believed that Batman considering retirement to be a possibility, because he has to put the costume on and rescue Dent from danger all the time . He can definitely admire Dent's courage...but thinking he can put down the costume despite that Dent is constantly targeted by the mob and the Joker?  Dent can barely save himself. No, I can't buy that for a million years.

[gordonblu]

The BIGGEST thing I'd change would be that Harvey survives the fall and has to be hidden away in Arkham for Batman's plan to work, thus leaving Two-Face free to use in DKR. Other than that any changes I'd make would be purely aesthetic; keep the Batman Begins suit, Joker ISN'T wearing makeup, Harvey's burn isn't SO severe that it is actually believable he could refuse pain killers and still function, etc.

[riddler]

I'd prefer the fall at the end be more ambiguous. Have Dent fall onto a truck or into water so it becomes unclear whether he lives or dies.

I'd remove have Batman fight the copycats. He's inspiring people  and they act as a deterrent. People standing up to criminals is a good thing in a city filled with corruption. They also provide a nice decoy. In the film we do see the criminals decide to hit banks simutaneously on the basis that Batman can only be in one spot. The copycats create more of an illusion that the batman could be anywhere (which as we see early on is deterring crime). Also it makes Bruce a hypocrite; why should he have the right to avenge crime and nobody else?


I'd clean up the joker arrest plot hole; Gordon wont let cops rattle his cage and taunt him for fear of giving his mob lawyer ammo yet he allows a masked vigilante to beat the prisoner senseless.

I'd have also cleaned up the Rachel death/Harvey scarring plot hole. There is no way the joker could have planned that one live and one survive especially without constantly knowing what time it was. The easiest way to solve this plot hole was to set motion sensors in on both prisoners; once someone entered ones building, that would set off the other bomb.

[The Dark Knight]

I'd remove have Batman fight the copycats. He's inspiring people  and they act as a deterrent. People standing up to criminals is a good thing in a city filled with corruption. They also provide a nice decoy. In the film we do see the criminals decide to hit banks simutaneously on the basis that Batman can only be in one spot. The copycats create more of an illusion that the batman could be anywhere (which as we see early on is deterring crime). Also it makes Bruce a hypocrite; why should he have the right to avenge crime and nobody else?

This is a big one in context of the Nolan trilogy's legacy. In TDK, Bruce says no to untrained people he doesn't know from a cake of soap suiting up to fight crime. In TDKR, Bruce says yes to an untrained person he doesn't know from a bar of soap suiting up to fight crime. The film makers either had to stay true to their original intention or get their message clear the first time.

[Travesty]

IMO, this entire movie is a mess. I think it has just as many plotholes and inconsistencies in it as TDKR, it's just the movies pace is much more frantic, so it's harder to tell.