The last word on the Joker's relation to The Dark Knight Trilogy

I have previously mentioned my obsession with Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight trilogy. Of course, when Heath Ledger died the Joker became immortalized somehow before the movie came out. I do really enjoy Ledger's performance in the film, but that is not what I want to write about. Instead, I want to write about the Joker's place in the trilogy and, by extension, what his role will and will not be in The Dark Knight Rises.

At the end of Batman Begins, we see a joker from a deck of cards and are told that it has been left at a crime scene. With this bit of foreshadowing, we see the Joker without seeing him. We feel his presence without him being there. Indeed, Ledger had not even been cast in the sequel yet when Batman Begins came out. Yet, this is the beginning of the character in Nolan's trilogy. It is very clever. I'll get back to this later

Obviously, now we get to the part of Heath Ledger's death, which occured before the The Dark Knight was released in theatres. When this happened, everyone started talking about the as-yet unreleased film (though thankfully filming had wrapped) and the already hotly anticipated summer blockbuster exploded in the press and in any movie lover's mind. The movie did not dissapoint, now we are left with what really is probably the greatest super-hero movie of all time. From an objective perspective, I just can't see the The Dark Knight being topped on a technical and artistic level. As for the way things are left at the end of it, the Joker has been captured by the Gotham Police Department but is still alive and well, unlike his real life counterpart.

Now, for the interesting part of the article. What will become of the Joker in The Dark Knight Rises? Well, Christopher Nolan has said  a few things and a few things can be inferred. To begin with, when The Dark Knight was being made, there was no story to speak of for the third chapter in the trilogy. That is not to say that the Joker was not supposed in the movie at all, but suffice it to say, I don't think his character arc was not set in stone. Nextly, this may be an obvious statement, but so far, each of these movies have had their own villains. What I mean by this is, there really aren't many people, myself included, that would want the Joker to be the main villain in two films of the trilogy, no matter how much they enjoyed Ledger's performance. The set villain for The Dark Knight Rises, Bane, seems like a good choice, and is exciting most fans. One thing that Nolan has been quoted as saying, and this might pretty much be the point of this article, is that the Joker will not be in The Dark Knight Rises. I take what he has said to mean that there will be no unused footage of Ledger in the film, nor will there be a look-a-like, CGI replacement, or any combination of the three. I think it is fair to say, however, that the Joker will be mentioned. At the very most, I think we would see something similar to his "calling card" at the end of Batman Begins. The problem with this is, of course, is the Joker's state at the end of The Dark Knight. The solution, however as much of a copout as it might seem, would be to have him escape from police custody soon after the events of the second movie and "go back to where he came from", never to be seen again. This would play up the ambiguity of the character, to be sure, but would it be a popular move and consistent with the trilogy? The more I think about it, the more I think it would. However, I can't help but think the Joker would have probably had some fantastic supporting role in The Dark Knight Rises had Heath Ledger not died.

In the end, we will just have to wait until July whn the third movie hits theatres. I think this film will be worthy of the other two in the series, but everyone of course is entitled to their own opinion. I am certainly looking forward to seeing Bane, and think he is a great choice for a villain. I think the Joker's presence will be felt somehow, however. I really am stoked for this film!

Citizen Kane

I really have a great respect for Citizen Kane. On a technical level, it was brilliant back in 1941 and even by today's standards it's incredibly inventive. Obviously, all the in-camera tricks pulled off in it could be done incredibly easily in modern times with digital manipulation, but the film remains a piece of masterly crafted cinema.

I also very much admire the story of the film and the accompanying structure. I've often read on the internet that people think Citizen Kane is incredibly boring, and in fact in my film-as-lit class in high school my teacher abandoned watching the movie because she had decided we would 'hate it'. I only finally watched Citizen Kane almost a year later and when I did found it to be very engaging. Needless to say, that was a class I did not enjoy very much. I passed with a C though :)

The things to remember Citizen Kane by:

• Nonlinear storytelling.


• Use of much stock footage.


• Pioneered the use of deep focus (the camera focusing on both the background and the foreground at the same time, often with actors moving back and forth between them).


• Use of the optical printer, which layers images over each other.


• Matte paintings.


• Make-up.


• William Randolph Hearst (look it up!).


• Orson Welles was jaw-dropping 25 years-old when he made this movie, and had already made his mark on radio. The rest of his life didn't exactly measure up, though (The Transformers: The Movie, anyone?).


• Pterodactyls in the background (look it up!).

That's about all I have to say about this great American classic, and while I know I didn't add much to the topic, it's still something I enjoy writing about.

Great Trilogies

I obsess over film trilogies. I obsess over a lot of stuff, but trilogies are near the top of the list. The Star Wars prequel trilogy is very difficult for me to deal with, because although I recognize there are a lot of flaws in them (I don't hate them), I'm still very drawn to them as they are one half of two trilogies, and I of course love the original trilogy. I think a complete saga in two trilogies is an amazing idea and that the series as a whole holds up pretty well to criticism. The other trilogies I obsess over include The Lord of the Rings, The Matrix, Back to the Future, and to a lesser extent The Godfather trilogy.

The Dark Knight trilogy is also a major obsession of mine. It's funny, because I like Batman, although I've never read the comics. I really enjoyed Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, but they aren't on my absolute favorites list. I really love the idea of taking more than 70 years of mythology and characters and turning it into a definitive trilogy with a beginning, middle, and end. I am aware that right now there is only 2/3 of a trilogy. Obviously, The Dark Knight Rises comes out in July and I am very excited.

The trilogy is a very under-appreciated and misused way of making movies in my opinion. The Spider-Man film series ended up being a trilogy, and, while it didn't leave any plot threads hanging, it was not exactly intended as that and is does not have the definitive "feel" that I think The Dark Knight trilogy will. Indeed, the series is now being rebooted, and we shall see which series ends up being the better.

I could go on and on about my thoughts on all of the trilogies mentioned, but I won't (and may some other time). Needless to say they all have strengths and weaknesses, but what I love about all of them is that they all each tell one story in three films and as result have a very large scope and feel like very big movies. Also I'm just an obsessive person who likes movies.

House, M.D.--The Team

House has gone on for eight years, and at the time of this writing, has eight episodes left to air. During that time, there have been many changes, of course, but the one constantly changing aspect has been House's team. The first three seasons, it was Cameron, Foreman, and Chase. At the end of season three, they all were fired or quit. The characters stayed on the show however, in varying capacities. The first half of season four was spent with House doing a "Survivor" like hiring process to find a new team. This resulted in Kutner, Thirteen, and Taub. Foreman also was brought back to the original team. At the end of season five, Kutner commited suicide. In the middle of season six, Cameron finally left the show for good. Chase also then came back to the team. After the season seven premiere, Thirteen left temporarily for most of the season, and after a few episodes of her absence, Masters was brought in for half a season. At the end of season seven, Thirteen left the team for good. In season eight, Adams and Park were then introduced. There have been many small variations that I have not addressed, but this is the jist of it.

I list all of this to say that I have enjoyed every variation of the team. The first three years really made it seem like House would keep the same cast for it's entire run, and the shake-up shocked me. However, the "revolving door" approach the show has since taken has kept the show's vitality up in a way that wouldn't have been possible otherwise. All of the changes in the team have been very interesting to follow, as well. Every different version of the team has contributed to the fact that House, M.D. as a whole is a very interesting and compelling body of work.