figured why not start a new thread on a possible thrid batman installment. Interesting interview with Nolan in regards to Batman III.

[spoil]
[align=left]
Christopher Nolan on 'Dark Knight' and its box-office billion: 'It's mystifying to me'
07:45 AM PT, Oct 27 2008

EXCLUSIVE: 'Dark Knight' director says he isn't sure he will make a third Bat-film. Why? He says: "I have to ask the question: How many good third movies in a franchise can people name?"


GB: Welcome back to L.A. So I'm curious, tell me one of the surprises you've had during the journey of this film after its release on July 18.

NOLAN: It’s funny, I’ve been asked a lot about the politics of the film. I dismiss all such analogies [laughs]. It really isn’t something we think about as we put the story together, myself, David Goyer and Jonathan [Nolan, brother of the director]. But I would point to the interrogation scene with Batman and the Joker — not that there is a specific political point, per se — but that I was interested in getting the actors to explore a paradox: How do you fight somebody who essentially thrives on aggression?


GB: It seems to me that, more often than not in a genre such as the one you’re working in, most of the political messaging has more to do with the viewer than the filmmaker. It’s inferred, not implied.

NOLAN: I agree completely. Especially if you do it right. If you’re working in a genre that is heightened reality. I like to talk about these films as having an operatic quality or being on a grand scale and a bit removed from the rhythms of real life, no matter how realistic we try to make the scenes themselves. In this scene, for instance, we went for the gritty realism in the textures of it, but it is a heightened reality. We’re trying to work on a more universal scale. If you get that right, people are going to be able to bring a wide variety of interpretations to it depending on who they are. It’s allowing the characters to be a conduit to the audience. Allowing an audience to sit there and relate to Batman and his dilemma Batpod1whether they are Republican or Democrat or whatever. ...

GB: "The Dark Knight" is closing in on $1 billion. How do you get your arms around that kind of success?

NOLAN: I can’t get my arms around it, to be quite frank. It’s mystifying. It’s terrific but at the same time it’s a little abstract, the numbers are so big. The biggest thrill for me would be, with the number of people who have gone to see the film, how "The Dark Knight" stood on the shoulders of the first film, how we were able to build the audience up and build the story up from the first film. That was really exciting to see. We were all pretty happy with the performance of the first film but so we really didn’t know, "Where does it go from there?" For it to become such a phenomenon is extraordinarily gratifying. I mean, I’ve spent now like six years or something working on Batman films. It becomes an important part of your life; you become very obsessive about it, and it's pretty fun when there are other people sharing your obsession and going to see the film a dozen times or whatever.

Wrapping your arms around the scale of the success, as you ask, I don’t find that possible really. There’s something liberating in knowing that my next film, whatever it is, isn’t going to make as much money [laughter]. I don’t have to try for years.


GB: Watching "The Dark Knight," it’s very easy to imagine the Joker returning to Gotham, the way his fate remains unresolved. When you were writing the film, did you anticipate that the Joker would be back in the third film?

NOLAN: No, really and in truth, I only deal with one film at a time. I find myself sort of protesting this issue a lot. We’ve never attempted to save anything for a sequel or set up anything for a sequel. That seems improbable to some people because, particularly with "Batman Begins," the film ended with a particular hook [with Jim Gordon showing Batman a Joker playing card announcing the arrival of a new villain in town]. But for me that was just about the excitement of people leaving the theater with the sense that now we have the character up and running. I wanted people to walk away with that sense in their head. You know, that he’s become the Batman in the movie. That’s why we had the title come up at the end, because it was "Batman Begins," and it was all very specific to that.

Then I got excited about seeing where that character would go. It was planned in advance, but it followed in that way. But we tried our hardest to really do everything in this movie that we would want to see the Joker do and to get that in the fabric of the story as much as possible. We wanted the Joker’s final taunt to Batman to be that they are locked in an ongoing struggle because of Batman’s rules. There’s a paradox there. Batman won’t kill. And the Joker is not interested in completely defeating Batman because he’s fascinated by him and he enjoys sparring with him. It’s trapped both of them. That was really the meaning of it. Of course what happened is Heath created the most extraordinary character that you would love to see 10 movies about. That’s the bittersweet thing. It was incredible characterization. It is a bittersweet thing for all of us.


GB: After the massive, military-level operation of making "Dark Knight," is there part of you leaning toward a smaller, more nimble sort of production next?

NOLAN: On one hand, yeah, there is a certain feeling to do that. After "Batman Begins," I certainly felt like taking on something smaller, but one of the things I got such a thrill from on "The Dark Knight" was shooting on Imax and creating that massive scale and achieving that larger-than-life quality. So that’s a lot of fun. I’m drawn in both directions now. So maybe what I need to do next is a very intimate, small story that happens to be photographed on a ridiculously large scale. Or vice versa [laughs].


GB: Could you see actually yourself not making the third Batman film?

NOLAN: Well ... let me think how to put this. There are two things to be said. One is the emphasis on story. What’s the story? Is there a story that’s going to keep me emotionally invested for the couple of years that it will take to make another one? That’s the overriding question. On a more superficial level, I have to ask the question: How many good third movies in a franchise can people name? [Laughs.] At the same time, in taking on the second one, we had the challenge of trying to make a great second movie, and there haven't been too many of those either. It’s all about the story really. If the story is there, everything is possible. I hope that was a suitably slippery answer.

-- Geoff Boucher

[/align]
[/spoil]

So Nolan is finally starting to talk himself into doing the next film. I hope he, Goyer, and his brother can find the angle their looking for. I would like to see one more film from this group before the studio hands the franchise over to someone else.

If Nolan wants to continue with socially relevant themes environmentalism (global warming), corporate greed, economic disparity, the drug culture, and the AIDS crisis all readily come to mind.

As I stated in the TDK thread, I would love for the film to include as many villains as possible. Numerous characters could further the story along by show-up for very brief, but poignant scenes. No superhero film has attempded this approach and the Bat books and TV shows have done this numerous times to great success.

Also, Nolan, while your challenging yourself to make a superier third film, I dare you to rethink your view on Robin. He/she can be portrayed in legitimate manner if you try and his/her inclusion would add a whole new dimension to your Batman.

Here is a very lenghty list of Bat villains to choose from (hidden for length):

[spoil][align=left]
- Abattoir
- Actuary
- Amygdala
- Anarky
- Axel Alex
- Bag O'Bones
- Bane
- Batzarro
- Benedict
- Billy Numerous
- Black Mask
- Black Spider
- Blockbuster
- Brains Beldon
- Bruno Groft and Lekkey
- Brutale
- Calculator
- Calendar Man
- Captain Stingaree
- Catfoot Regan and Beetles Branagan
- Catman
- Catwoman
- Cavalier
- Charlatan
- Clayface
- Cluemaster
- Colonel Sulphur
- Copperhead
- Cornelius Stirk
- Corrosive Man
- Crazy Quilt Boy
- Crime Doctor
- Crimesmith
- Cyber Cat
- Dagger
- Deacon Blackfire
- Deadshot
- Doctor Double X
- Doctor Phosphorus
- Doctor Tzin-Tzin
- Doctor Zodiac
- Dodge
- Doodlebug
- Eivol Ekdal
- Electrocutioner
- Facade
- Falcone crime family
- False Face
- Film Freak
- Firebug
- Firefly
- Frederick Rhino
- Gearhead
- General
- Gentleman Ghost
- Gentleman Jim Jansen
- Getaway Genius
- Gorilla Boss
- Graham
- Great White Shark
- Gregorian Falstaff
- Gunhawk
- Harley Quinn
- Headhunter
- Henri Ducard
- Hugo Strange
- Human Eraser
- Humpty Dumpty
- Hush
- Jane Doe
- Joe Chill
- Johnny Warlock
- Johnny Witts
- Junkyard Dog
- KGBeast
- Killer Croc
- Killer Moth
- King Snake
- Kite Man
- Kyodai Ken
- Lady Vic
- Lazara
- Lew Moxon
- Lunkhead
- Lynx
- Mabuse
- Madame Zodiac
- Magpie
- Man-Bat
- Maroni crime family
- Maxie Zeus
- Metalhead
- Mime
- Mirage
- Mirror Man
- Mister Esper
- Monarch
- Mr. Freeze
- Mr. Polka-Dot
- Mr. Zsasz
- Nicodemus
- NKVDemon
- Nocturna
- Ogre and Ape
- Orca
- Panara
- Penny Plunderer
- Pix
- Planet Master
- Poison Ivy
- Professor Milo
- Professor Radium
- Prometheus
- Rainbow Beast
- Ra's and Talia al Ghul:
- Ratcatcher
- Red Hood
- Ruby Ryder
- Rupert Thorne
- Savage Skull
- Sewer King
- Shrike
- Signalman
- Snowman
- Spellbinder
- Starman
- Steeljacket
- Sterling Silversmith
- Tally Man
- Ten-Eyed Man
- Thanatos
- The Blue Bat
- The Bouncer
- The Crimson Knight
- The Dummy
- The Fearsome Foot-Fighters
- The Joker
- The Mad Hatter
- The Mad Monk
- The Mole
- The Monster Men
- The Mortician
- The Outsider
- The Penguin
- The Phantasm
- The Reaper
- The Riddler
- The Scarecrow
- The Spook
- The Squid
- The Synaptic
- The Terrible Trio ( Fox, the Shark, and the Vulture)
- The Trigger Twins
- The Ventriloquist
- The Werewolf
- The Wrath
- Thor
- Tony Zucco
- Torque
- Tweedledum and Tweedledee
- Two-Face
- Zebra-Man
- Zeiss
- Zodiac

source
[/align]
[/spoil]

sounds fishy.
[spoil]
[align=left]By GORDON SMART
and JESS ROGERS

Published: 18 Dec 2008

FUNNYMAN EDDIE MURPHY will play The Riddler in the next Batman movie, The Sun can reveal.

The Beverly Hills Cop star, 47, has been signed up by British director CHRISTOPHER NOLAN to reprise the role played by JIM CARREY in 1995’s Batman Forever.

The surprise move follows speculation linking Pirates of the Caribbean star JOHNNY DEPP to the part.

The film, set for a 2010 release, is being developed under the working title Gotham.

Execs have also signed up rising Transformers star SHIA LABEOUF, 22, to play Robin.

CHRISTIAN BALE will return as Bruce Wayne, while MICHAEL CAINE will again play Bruce’s assistant Alfred.

Meanwhile, Brit RACHEL WEISZ is said to be up for the Catwoman role.

Insiders also revealed to The Sun the flick will end on a cliffhanger over whether Batman survives a blast at Wayne Towers.

Nolan had been tight-lipped about the future of the Batman films after being rocked by the January death of HEATH LEDGER — tipped to receive a posthumous Oscar for his role as The Joker in The Dark Knight.

A film insider said: “Chris wasn’t sure if he wanted to do another movie but as soon as he decided to, he got the wheels in motion.

“Eddie’s a fantastic addition. Everyone’s excited to see what he does as the Riddler.” [/align][/spoil]

strong with the force you are.
[spoil][align=left]There is not one shred of reality in any of these rumors. The latest batch has Eddie Murphy as THE RIDDLER and Rachel Weisz as Catwoman and apparently Shia LaBeouf as someone.

If ANY OF YOU believe any of this bullshit, you have found some crazy awesome drugs and I would like to have some of what you're having. Here's the latest facts on a sequel to DARK KNIGHT...

No talent has a finished contract yet. Specifically, Chris Nolan doesn't have a deal. The word I'm having is that Chris would like to do another project before leaping back into BATMAN - if he decides to do another. We're hearing he may very well do THE PRISONER next - which would mean... no valid BATMAN rumors until much later.

There is no story treatment on anybody's desk at Warners. No accepted pitches. No talent beyond Chris Nolan has been approached. Now... would Warners like to be immediately in development on the new caped crusader film with Bale and Nolan? You betcha, but that's why they're giving Nolan the room he needs to come back to the cowl.

Personally - I'd like Nolan to jettison Bale and make DARK KNIGHT RETURNS and close out his tenure on BATMAN. Starting the next one... 30 years later - a grizzled roughed up and quasi-Fascist BATMAN and a near police state Gotham... I'd just love. and I'd love to have Mickey Rourke play Bats in it.

BUT YOU SEE WHAT I JUST DID. I just made some bullshit up. Some stuff I would just love to have happen. BUT IT HAS NO BASIS IN REALITY.

Now in the Talkback below - see if you can make up better BATMAN 3 rumors than the folks at E!, SUN and countless other bullshit sites that are just desperate for hits. BUT whatever you do. PLEASE STOP SENDING US THESE LINKS TO BULLSHIT BATMAN RUMORS - It really is getting ridiculous.[/align][/spoil]





Now personally, I'd like to see Clint Eastwood as Bat's, 30 years later. Dark Knight Returns baby.

I just hope that they don't fuck this up.






The third film is often where these things go off the beam.

That's good that Warner Brothers wants Nolan back at the helm, he's after all what's made these reboots a success.






Hopefully if they do a third one it's done as good as The Dark Knight.

Harry as the voice of reason?

What makes you so sure about that?

What are you refering to? Warners wanting Nolan back or he being the reason for the reboot success?

If the reboot success is what you question I would have to say being the writer and directer of the best superhero franchise to date would make him squarely responsible for most of the success. You don't agree? I understand that Ledger's death might have played some part in this movie getting to $520+ million and the award nomination talk but honestly this movie was going to make $350+ without Ledger's death being involved. It was deemed a success before Nolan started filming the sequel.

I'm talking about the writer/director being responsible for the reboot's success.

Did it really take more than just some producers saying, "Hey, let's make the Batman films over again. But darker!" Batman existed before Nolan and previous incarnations also did blockbuster business. Plus, there's nothing too particular about Nolan's approach. He treats it a bit more realistically than previous films incarnations sure, but it plays like any other modern crime film except with costumes and more thematic music.

Yeah, and everybody had been doing so much better before Nolan. You actually expect this franchise to do this well after Batman and Robin without Nolan's vision? And believe me Producers just saying "do it darker" does not get the franchise to this point.

the Punisher movies are proof of that. just saying "darker" doesn't automatically mean BETTER. There had to be the plot, the story, the characters, the actors, the music, the design, it all had to come together. The Nolan's were integral to this comming together the way it did. It could have been a disaster.

This has to be Bullshit.

None of that is true. Period.

Casting wouldn't even start at this juncture; nor will the film be done for 2010.

I doubt Eddie Murphy would take such a job.

Whew! I figured. Thanks!

That whole thing is hilarious.

For instance, Nolan's made it clear, a few times, that he does not care for Robin (neither do I) and will not be using him in his Batman movies.

Think about it, the whole copycat Batmen thing was really just Nolan's explanation of why this Batman doesn't want nor need sidekicks.

how bout a Batman 7? MTV.com says thanks to the success of Dark Knight, WB now views Batman like Harry Potter, and will include several more sequels past this 3rd! History repeating itself. This was tried before and we got Bat-Nipples.

Robin would be the death knell for this particular group who've thus far very successfully portray the Dark Knight.

Christian Bale has also said he would not participate in a movie with a Robin character,this I hope coupled with Christopher Nolan saying same will keep WB from any dimwit idea of introducing Robin into these movies.

FYI: Goyer and Jonah Nolan are currently writing the next Batman film link.

UPDATE: The elder Nolan brother is now attached to the film. Also, he is developing the next Superman link.

Interesting.

I guess I'm the only person that would actually like to see Nolan's take on Robin, if only because it seems like such a risky, out-there move for the franchise thus far and coming off "The Dark Knight" where else can this iteration of the franchise go?

I can still remember the inicial comments everywhere when they picked Heath Ledger to play Joker, so, i'm not at all against the Robin idea if the cards are dealt right.

If they did, they would have to kill Robin in some drama filled extravaganza by the end of said film. Making it a hallmark of the rebooted series would be a big mistake, but done right, it could be okay. Hell, the Robin in the Dark Knight comics was done in a way that actually worked in my opinion. Not that they should do that here either.

However, no matter what, there is one change they must make or it will drive me out of my bat-skull. I don't give a shit what else they do in the next movie, but god damnit please, please do something with the batvoice. It's got to be changed, subtily less gravely and less like he's constipated even. Something. It's on the right track, but it just needs to be much less annoying. It totally took me "out of the movie" in the second one. I don't remember it being that bad in the first one. But I almost developed tourets and started screaming "Shaddapyoufuckwhatinthefuck?!?" and spitting popcorn out of my mouth when he said:

The Bale (in Bat-voice)
"The city needs a hero Harvey. And you can be that hero."

Criiiinge, followed by eye-roll, followed by disappointment that that could have been (and maybe was to some folks) a great moment in the movie. And it bugged me that I had to hear it thinking Batman was about to poop hisself.

But WTF do I know.

Whatever the Nolan’s have planned, I’m sure it’s well planned. I can’t think of a single Nolan film that hasn’t been meticulously designed and executed.

For whatever reason, I am more preoccupied by the next Superman film. To me, it would be best to take the serial’s approach of representing Sup’s as a man’s man. As such, it would be useless to consider anyone other than Jon Hamm for the lead.

I remember reading somewhere that they actually made his voice lower and MORE gravely with some kinda computer filtered affects. It really was horrible and way too over the top.

About Robin. It would've been really nice if Heath hadn't died and the Joker was in the next one and killed the new Robin with a crowbar. I don't see Robin being in this one though.



And who wants to wager it will be in 3D?

I've never read that but it's pretty obvious just listening to it that his voice has been digitally altered as it's so different to the same vocal technique from the first film, here's hoping its not repeated should there be a 3rd film, the cinema I first saw it at had a really crappy audio setup and the bat-voice vibrated their speakers really badly. The music also was too loud incidentally so we missed Gordon's final speech at the end too...I mean how hard is it to get the audio mix right for these so called professionals?!

yeah, I remember how freakin loud those guns were in his little white bat-cave. people were wincing in pain and covering their ears in the theater.

That was intentional in my view when you hear Alfred comment to Bruce about the noise of the guns.

The man speaks: LA Times Interview with Chris Nolan

[spoil][align=left]Nolan said that he admired Singer’s film, especially the way it connected to director Richard Donner’s version of Superman and the first two movies starring Reeve. Nolan added, though, that this new movie will stand on its own.

NOLAN QUOTES:

- “It’s very exciting; we have a fantastic story,” “And we feel we can do it right. We know the milieu, if you will, we know the genre and how to get it done right.”

- “A lot of people have approached Superman in a lot of different ways. I only know the way that has worked for us that’s what I know how to do,” “Each serves to the internal logic of the story. They have nothing to do with each other.”

- “He basically told me, ‘I have this thought about how you would approach Superman,’” “I immediately got it, loved it and thought: That is a way of approaching the story I’ve never seen before that makes it incredibly exciting. I wanted to get Emma and I involved in shepherding the project right away and getting it to the studio and getting it going in an exciting way.”

- “I went to the studio with the analogy of ‘I want to cast the way they did in 1978 with 'Superman,”’ where they had [Marlon] Brando and Glenn Ford and Ned Beatty and all these fantastic actors in even small parts, which was an exotic idea for a superhero movie at the time. It really paid off too. As a kid watching ‘Superman,’ it seemed enormous and I realized later by looking at it that a lot of that was actually the casting, just having these incredibly talented people and these characterizations. And Marlon Brando is the first guy up playing Superman’s dad. It’s incredible.”

- “That’s a very sly way of asking a question I’m not going to answer.”

- “We’re approaching it in a not dissimilar way in terms of trying to find an incredible story in a way that audiences can engage with it the way they engage with contemporary action films,” “I think David’s approach is a very good way of doing just that.”

- “My brother is writing a script for me and we’ll wait to see how it turns out - He’s struggling to put it together into the epic story that you want it to be.”

- “Without getting into specifics, the key thing that makes the third film a great possibility for us is that we want to finish our story,” “And in viewing it as the finishing of a story rather than infinitely blowing up the balloon and expanding the story.”

- “We have a great ensemble, that’s one of the attractions of doing another film, since we’ve been having a great time for years.”

- “It won’t be Mr. Freeze.”

- “I’m very excited about the end of the film, the conclusion, and what we’ve done with the characters,” “My brother has come up with some pretty exciting stuff. Unlike the comics, these things don’t go on forever in film and viewing it as a story with an end is useful. Viewing it as an ending, that sets you very much on the right track about the appropriate conclusion and the essence of what tale we’re telling. And it harkens back to that priority of trying to find the reality in these fantastic stories. That’s what we do.”[/align][/spoil]

So, is Batman to die or resign? Does finality mean that Gotham will be crime-free by the end of the movie or will the city simply be able to defend itself on its own without the aide of a protector? At this point, I'm not completely sure what would be a natural conclusion for the Nolan’s trilogy.

Same here but if he has a solid way to wrap his story, a story which doesn't have any real loose ends to tie up, then I guess that's why the man gets paid the big bucks.

I think you can tie up a story arc without Batman dying or crime having been extinguished. If Spider-man 3 had been better made, the final frames were a fitting end to the 3-film story arc, which to me, was the Green Goblin saga. That was the story.

That being said, the constant in both Batman films is Bruce's obsession and struggle with being a crime fighter. The only logical conclusion Nolan can take that story arc is either: a) cleaning up Gotham to the point that the people do not fear the underworld/the rule of law is upheld; b) Batman dies.

Or both and Batman becomes some kind of Martyr.

In any case, the villain(s) must be appropriate. Riddler might be a little too much like Joker for me. We'll see.

I agree.

To me it seems as though Nolan is using the western as a model for his Batman films (Batman being the new sheriff/lone gunfighter in a lawless town and he totally cribbed from "Shane" for "TDK's" final moments) so it wouldn't surprise me to see him carry this motif through in the next film. Who knows, maybe he'll pull a Frank Miller and age the character up a bit in the final chapter.

Death seems like an unlikely outcome the more I think about. The first film is essentially about a man overcoming his fear, anger, and guilt. The second is about a man transcending his own ideals. I don’t think the final lesson of the trilogy will be “if you overcome personal obstacles and believe in yourself you will die.”

Given how Nolan mentions the benefit of a strong ensemble cast, I wonder if this is a signal that he is taking an ensemble approach to the film’s villains. I am also curious about the franchise post-Nolan.

It stands to reason that Warner Brothers will move the story’s timeline into the future. After all, a live-action Batman Beyond film was in the planning phase around 2000. In general, a sci-fi setting would give a fresh start to a character that is now in his seventh modern-day film. Moreover, it would make it more plausible for some of the supernatural Bat-villains to enter the mix.

That's the Batman movie I want to see.

Nolan says "No Joker for Batman III"

[spoil][align=left]Empire asked whether the villain could be a returning (and recast) Joker. "No," said Nolan resisting to elaborate, "I just don't feel comfortable about it."


source: EmpireOnline

Nolan on Batman III & Superman Future:

- "It's much more specific than that"

- "What it is, while David Goyer and myself were putting together the story for another Batman film a few years ago - you know, thrashing out where we might move on from 'The Dark Knight' - we got stuck. We were just sitting there idly chatting and he said, ' By the way, I think I know how you approach Superman,' and he told me his take on it. I thought it was really tremendous. It was the first time I had been able to conceive of how you would address Superman in a modern context. I thought it was a very exciting idea."

- "But it's not something for me to direct", "It's something we were just trying to put together a vision for, and then find the right person to take it forward.", "What you have to remember with both Batman and Superman", "is that what makes those the best superhero characters there are, the most beloved after all this time, is the essence of who those characters were when they were created and when they were first developed. And you can't ever move too far from that."

- "No I haven't. There is a point where you're just being precious about it and people get annoyed, but the God's honest truth is I work on one movie at a time. I'm only capable of doing that, so my head will continue to be firmly in ['Inception'] for another few months."

- "My brother is working on the screenplay. We came up with a story that we are very excited about. We particularly like where we are taking the characters and what the ending is... There are things for me to be very excited about in addressing the characters again. But ultimately it always comes down to the script, and can we make a great film from this? That's something I will firmly be turning my attention to figuring out fairly soon." It will be, he said, "the finishing of a story rather than infinitely blowing up the balloon and expanding the story."

- "Marvel are doing what they do and people will respond to that really well, or they won't"

- "It's not something I ever really applied a blanket rule to, but Marvel characters are very different to DC characters, and the key DC characters are very different to the minor DC characters."

- "You've got to go back to that element of, 'What do I see when I close my eyes and think of Batman? What do I see when I close my eyes and think of Superman?' And for me a big part of that is their individuality. They are extraordinary beings in an ordinary world."

- "And the reason I think the two are fascinating is because Superman is very specifically superpowered and obviously otherworldly; Batman is very human and flawed. They're two very different characters, but there's an elemental feeling of power in the iconography of those characters. To me that's originally because they stood alone. I need to hang on to that in my imagining of them."[/align][/spoil]

It's probably for the best.

I've got a feeling the next film won't rely so much on a familiar villain (although I'm sure Nolan will use someone from the classic rogues gallery) but will focus on Batman himself. It might not make for the best big event summer spectacle but I'd really like to see the relationship between Batman and Gordon take center stage.

I'm just glad he's sticking to his guns and saying that this movie will be the end of his trilogy. Sounds like he plans to have a definite resolution that can't be picked up again by Warners with a new director. Damned if the WB won't try though. I hope the Nolans surprise us yet again.

This is coming about two years too late but screw it, it's a good listen either way: Nolan talks to critic Elvis Mitchell about The Dark Knight on The Treatment.