Die, Dark Knight, Die?
December 1st, 2011




Galley Friend B.W. sends along this totally intriguing little essay suggesting that Chris Nolan must kill Bruce Wayne at the end of Dark Knight Rises. It reminds me of the literary alchemy debates whirling around the final Harry Potter book. I’m not sure I’m convinced at the idea that Nolan is making dual trilogies, but I think it’s nearly accepted wisdom that he likes to structure his films like magic tricks. (Sorry, illusions. A trick is something a whore does for money. Or candy.)

The Joseph Gordon-Levitt angle feels completely plausible.



  1. Galley Wife December 1, 2011 at 2:33 pm

    Illusions, Dad! You don’t have time for my illusions!

  2. REPLY
  3. SkinsFanPG December 1, 2011 at 2:34 pm

    JVL, do you feel pride or shame that your wife quotes Gob Bluth?

  4. REPLY
  5. Galley Friend J.E. December 1, 2011 at 3:04 pm

    Won’t happen for a lot of reasons. Most important is that, though Nolan may be tired of him, Warner Bros isn’t tired of making money. And at some point (soon) the studio will want to do it again. A dead Batman means it’s going to be really hard to get anyone other than Dennis Dugan to direct Adam Sandler in Batman Reborn, and by comparison the plot device will make Spock’s coming alive in ST3 seem like Shakespeare.

    Then there’s the fact that it won’t have focus grouped well. Lots of people will tell them that “Batman belongs to everyone” and it’s not up to them to say who lives and dies. They don’t like getting angry letters and emails from the faithful whose dreams are being destroyed by this violation of the zeitgeist. When word leaks, and it will, there will be mass threats to boycott the film so as not to experience the death; and while there may be some who go specifically to see it, a dead Batman means many fewer repeat ticket buyers…which is how a movie gets to a billion-dollar b.o.

    Batman won’t die for the same reason there’s no Titanic 2.

  6. REPLY
  7. Ben December 1, 2011 at 3:28 pm

    Interesting theory. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is clearly a logical follow-on at some point in his career. But I doubt that Nolan would make such a huge step only because it’d make for such a crowded and emotionally confused ending, and certainly lacking clarity. Plus Warner Bros. would be hamstrung by having Levitt, basically a non-character, be announced as the star of whoever does the next one without Nolan’s participation. To do such a thing changes Batman fundamentally. The Wayne character/rich kid/murdered parents/imagery stuff is such a key element to the darkness of the franchise. “Hero cop becomes Batman” is something new and altogether abhorrent to me.

  8. REPLY
  9. Galley Wife December 1, 2011 at 4:09 pm

    The real problem is she keeps saying God is going to show me a sign…the something of my ways…wisdom? It was probably wisdom.

    I’ve made a huge mistake.

  10. REPLY
  11. SB December 1, 2011 at 5:34 pm

    Enjoyed reading the theory, and I’d love to see Nolan do a realistic, gritty version of “Knightfall,” but it won’t happen. In part because Warners will never let Batman die onscreen; in part because the movie that he’s described would have to be 3.5 hours long to make any sense (notice he totally forgot about Catwoman, who needs to be introduced, built up, given a payoff of her own, etc.).

  12. REPLY
  13. Jason O. December 1, 2011 at 8:18 pm

    Galley Friend J.E. is, sadly, correct.

  14. REPLY
  15. Brian Faughnan December 1, 2011 at 9:20 pm

    As is “Ben.” Whoever that is.

  16. REPLY
  17. Dark Knight Rises, Site News (Updated) — Jonathan Last Online May 2, 2012 at 11:29 am

    […] Most of the deep Kremlinology done about DKR has concerned Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s role. Is he Jean-Paul Valley? Is he there […]

COMMENT