MovieChat Forums > The Dark Knight Rises (2012) Discussion > The director refuses to give closure

The director refuses to give closure

posted 3 years ago by Biggs111Mr (247)
9 replies | jump to latest

It's like he keeps on teasing us for the whole while which sucks. The Joker is left hanging with no mention of what happens to him & that's ridiculous. He's a powerhouse villain! He must get closure somehow. This should not be left to the viewer uh uh no way. Then Scarecrow pops up as a judge?! Wtf was up with that? Why doesn't Batman or Gordon do something about the creep? No closure for Robin either. How can that be? The sidekick gets introduced to us & it goes no where. Why doesn't the director elaborate on Robin & give us another movie with Robin coming into himself as our new superhero? I really had problems with the Batman movies with all these things on top. I'll take any answer that can satisfy.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

The Joker had closure, he was arrested and ended up in Arkham

The Scarecrow was probably re-arrested and sent to Arkham or Blackgate

Robin does not appear in this film, we have an original character named Robin John Blake who had closure as well, he took over the batcave and would be the silent guardian who would protect Gotham should evil ever rise again. This was not meant to tease a sequel or anything, it was a justification for Bruce leaving Gotham and completely his character arc.

[–] Biggs111Mr (247) 3 years ago

Batman got closure. I had no issue there with what they did with him. Your answers are real good I appreciate it but the Scarecrow doesn't work using how he probably got arrested for the second time because nothing here is ever shown of that so no closure there.

[–] Druff (1802) 3 years ago

There was a quick scene at the end showing a vast number of the ex-prisoners who were running the city under Bane who were now on their knees with their hands behind their head, at the gunpoint of GPD officers. That was shorthand for "All of the ex-prisoners were rounded up and put back in prison." Scarecrow would have been included in that, there's no reason to assume he got away. Sorry they didn't show him specifically just so you could sleep at night.

[–] Biggs111Mr (247) 3 years ago

There's great great chance he got away! The Scarecrow is original & he was in the first Batman movie & he was a very important villain. They are supposed to show what happens to him not let us take guesses. The movie was already too long as it is so maybe that's why it wasn't covered.

[–] Druff (1802) 3 years ago

They didn't give any hint whatsoever that he got away so I don't see why you insist on assuming or speculating that he did.

[–] Biggs111Mr (247) 3 years ago

Um it's because he was dropped & to me that wasn't good u know.

[–] Ace_Spade (9574) 3 years ago

Scarecrow didn't bug me because I just assumed he got arrested again. It's already a really long movie, so I don't need more scenes at the end.

Joker should have been in the movie a lot, but Heath Ledger died, so I think they just thought it would be more respectful to just let the hanging man be the end of his arc, even if it was a bit of an anticlimax.

[–] Biggs111Mr (247) 3 years ago

Um I think the Joker had only about 20 or so minutes of screen time in the sequel. He was supposed to return for the trilogy but we all know why. The Scarecrow had about 15 or so minutes in the original then only 2-3 minutes for the rest of the series which was ridiculous to me. It also was lame that the Joker never got mentioned in the last movie. How could they do that when the maniac cause almost all of that chaos alone?!?

[–] Ace_Spade (9574) 3 years ago

Yeah, again, I think they just let Joker alone because of Ledger's death. They thought if they couldn't use the character it wouldn't make sense to bring him up.

I do agree with you that Scarecrow was underused. Cillian Murphy turned in a great performance in part one, he's put into part two almost like, "Remember this guy: he's important," and then in part three, nothing. So, yeah, I agree with you there.