The Dark Knight Rises Anticipation Station

[Klaus]

JacksonArcher wrote:

---

Also, no 3D for the film. Thank God for that!

QFT!

[Captaindemotion]

Alidar Jarok wrote:

---

While the Joker stole the show in the second film, the film was about Bruce Wayne (and even Harvey Dent) more. Casting the Riddler could make the series too villain-centric.

Casting Tom Hardy as a villain (assuming that's what he's playing could also have that effect. He's become a real show-stealer.

[Agent Richard07]

Too bad about the Riddler. I wanted to see as many of the classic villains as possible get re-imagined.

[JacksonArcher]

Also, I like the one comment from the article that everyone seemed to browse over: That we're getting a story focused on Bruce Wayne. As much as I loved The Dark Knight, I felt on some level that it really was a story about Harvey Two-Face, Gordon and the Joker and Batman was more of a supporting character in his own film. I want to see the focus back on Bruce Wayne, like Batman Begins. I'm glad that seems to be the case.

[thumbtack]

Shockingly stupid title. But at least the 3D fad has been laid to rest.

[Obiwanshinobi]

The Dark Knight Returns, not to confuse with Frank Millar's book, would have sufficed.

[Agent Richard07]

The article also mentions Mr. Freeze. It would have been nice to see the character appear briefly just like the Scarecrow did in The Dark Knight. I can imagine Batman taking down some guy who is wearing something that looks like a bomb squad suit, causing trouble with a homemade freezing spray gun contraption.

[ManOnTheWave]

Regardless of the title, I'll be seeing this in theatre. Probably three times. Nolan makes the candy I want.

[DigificWriter]

I was going to call BS on this, but went to two sites that I trust - IGN and Batman on Film before I did so, and they both confirm it. Since it's been confirmed, I have to say that many of the more popular titles - Gotham City, The Batman, etc. - really don't fit the theme of the film as promised/teased by the ending of The Dark Knight, whereas this title, even though it's a bit more pedestrian and formulaic than either of the two previous titles, doesn't have that drawback.

Not using The Riddler as the villain - which is what many were expecting - does offset the selection of a rather pedestrian title, so i'm fine with it. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised at this point if Nolan and Co. select as a villain someone we - as an audience - aren't expecting. It would be great to see them once again tackle one of Batman's more obscure, lesser-known villains the way that they did with Batman Begins and the inclusion of Ras al Ghul.

[Captain Craig]

Don't like the title at all. It screams of marketing attachment to TDK by mandate of the suits. Everyone was going to know this was the followup to the smash hit, having the nomencalture be similar was not necessary.

Not RoJoHen wrote:

---

Having the last two films be "The Dark Knight," though, really does make "Batman Begins" feel like it doesn't even belong in this series.

Exactly. The idea that each movie might have a named association with a facet of the character appealed to me.

Caped Crusader or Shadow of the Bat would both have been a better fit.

Simple association of the name to the movie.
He began
He became a knight
He is the crusader or The city is under his shadow

[DigificWriter]

To the people who are saying that this title makes Batman Begins feel out of place, I'm calling BS on you; each of the first two films deals with a particular theme that is reflected in its title; Batman Begins is the beginning of the story, not only from an in-universe perspective, but also form a real-world perspective in that it is a 'new' beginning for the Batman franchise; The Dark Knight's title reflects the darker nature of the film and the fact that, in-universe, Gotham has become a darker place with the rise of the mob and characters like the Joker. By the end of The Dark Knight, Batman had fallen - both of his own choice and out of necessity - meaning that there was only one logical track for the story of B3 to take: the story of his redemption/resurrection. There really aren't a whole lot of one-word titles out there that could reflect this that would still fit the Batman universe and mythos, both from the comics and as Nolan had re-imagined them. The Dark Knight Rises may be pedestrian - particularly in comparison to The Dark Knight and Batman Begins - but it really conveys the idea that this film will be about Batman's redemption, which is what The Dark Knight's ending hinted at.

[RoJoHen]

We get what the title means. It just makes the title of "Batman Begins" feel out of place amongst the other titles, not that the film itself no longer fits with the other films.

[Captain Craig]

To those defending The Dark Knight Rises as a great title I call BS on you.
Your just so quick to defend it. Batman's 'rise' doesn't have to be reflected strictly in the title ala Begins.
See we can do it also.

[RoJoHen]

And to me, at least, "The Dark Knight Rises" sounds more like a subtitle that a main title. Though I really don't like subtitles, "Batman: The Dark Knight Rises" would make more sense to me.

[Christopher]

Saul's Eye wrote:

---

Better than "The Caped Crusader" which sounds like it belongs to the 90s.

I'm curious why you'd associate that title with the '90s. I see it more as a product of the '60s and '70s. I think it fell out of use in the comics when they went darker.

The Dark Knight Rises, close to the Dark Knight Returns.

Now people are going to have trouble using TDKR as an acronym without confusing people.

GoldenPumpkin wrote:

---

In retrospect, sure, but at the time it seemed appropriate and in line with what came before.

Well, structurally it was in line with previous titles, but conceptually it was intended more in opposition to previous movies. It was important to say right up front, in the clearest possible terms, that this was a new beginning and not a continuation of what Joel Schumacher did.