Joseph Gordon-Levitt on The Dark Knight Rises ending

News Simon Brew 16 Aug 2012 - 06:33

Don't read this if you haven't seen Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises...

This story isn't one you should be reading if you haven't seen The Dark Knight Rises, as it involves a chat about the ending of the film.

So, if you've not seen the movie, even though we love that you've taken time out of your life to visit the site, it's best we part company for a bit.

Still here? Let's get going, then.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt is on promotional duties for his new movies, Premium Rush and Looper, and he's appeared on Jimmy Kimmel Live in the US as a result. Kimmel, as part of the interview, asked him directly about the ending of The Dark Knight Rises, and what happens to Gordon-Levitt now. Is he going to take over the franchise? Will he be Robin in his own movie?

"I don't get to decide those things", the actor said. But why, asked Kimmel, would they set up that ending, and then walk away from the franchise?

"I don't think it's necessarily a setup", said Gordon-Levitt. "I think it is a great ending for that trilogy. If you go back to Batman Begins, he's talking about how Batman is more than a man, a symbol. A hero can be anybody, and we all have heroes inside of us, and that's the thing that runs through the entire trilogy".

Predictably, then, there seem to be no firm plans for a Gordon-Levitt-headlined spin-off right now, although we do still wonder if that's one of the most obvious paths for Warner Bros to follow. We'll keep you posted as we hear more...

Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook chum here.

Disqus - noscript

... and thousands of Jimmy Kimmel viewers who haven't seen the film suddenly cry out "Robin?! What?!" with half of them then going on to smash their television sets having had the ending spoiled.

Not every film needs a follow-up. Let an ending be and ending.

At the end of the day, if the bean counters see something in it, there's a fair chance something will happen, but like JGL says, it's a great ending and personally I'd be happy if that was that.

I think it's a massively obvious path for WB to follow and they would be foolish not to do so. WB should do a NIGHTWING movie set in the Nolan Batman Universe but further into the future. Gives the chance to use the 'heightened reality' of Nolans universe but have it's own image aesthetic. With all the advanced tech used by Batman in TDKR, u can imagine a future Gotham were certain elements have been filtered into daily life.

I would personally like to see a Robin movie of him squatting in the cave under an orphanage trying to figure out how to use the Bat gadgets, breaking them and having no way of repairing them

The ending opens up all kinds of possibilities, which I reckon is what Nolan wanted, people to be discussing it and guessing what happens next. The best would be to just leave it alone but I guess the suits want to squeeze as much as possible out of the franchise, which scares me if Nolan isn't involved. To see a Robin movie without Batman in it seems like half a movie to me, and I wouldn't want that. Not enough people know about Nightwing to make it successful and JGL doesnt have the right build and look to be a new Batman so I really think (and I hate to say this) that the trilogy needs to rest there and move onto a new Justice League universe.

I agree that the ending in itself works as a conclusion to the trilogy - after all, it was the only way for Bruce Wayne to have a normal life. BUT having a JGL-helmed Nightwing movie might be a good idea insofar as they wouldn't be asking audiences to accept a new Batman straight away. If it failed, they could always cast a new Batman a couple of years after that... Surely they have nothing to lose?

Why do people need things to be either tied up or hae spin offs come from these type of endings? I like the idea that the World in which The batman lives, continues on without us.

Amen to that, voodoomonkey dude, Chris Nolan merely gives us a glimpse at John Blake's POSSIBLE future direction but not a certainty, Bruce Wayne gives Blake the keys to the kingdom (so to speak), but the rest is left to his good and capable judgement, and when Blake steps on the platform that raises up out of the water, the last shot of the movie reflects it's title; 'The Dark Knight Rises'. The movie is as much about Blake as it is about Wayne, as one story ends, another one (possibly) begins, albeit one we'll never see onscreen, and rightly so...

That would be awesome! He could just give up at the end and become a crack-head

Nah. Just reboot. Nolan's movies are cool, but that trilogy is over.

I enjoyed the ending of the movie. The only, slight, miniscule complaint i have, and it isn't major, is I wish John Blake's real name had been revealed to be "Richard Grayson".
It is a minor thing, but it would have been an extra boost for me as a long time fan of the character and the supporting characters of that comic.

So Batman was a success. WB need more success. Chris Nolan has made his last Batman film, and Jonny Nolan is desperate to make a feature film. I don't think it would be a massive leap to have J Nolan work with WB, and JGL to make a follow up to the C Nolan trilogy. WB would be daft not to give J Nolan a shot at it, after his involvement in TDKR. Or another way to look at it, Chris Nolan said it was his last batman film. Technically he could do a Nightwing movie, as it's not a batman story. He is pretty invested in WB at the moment, and he is WBs Golden Goose.

If they did continue his story-line, he wouldn't be Robin, seeing as that's his first name, that'd be like having a superhero called James or Greg....

Bruce Wayne have a normal life? This whole trilogy has been a farce and time won't be kind to it once someone comes along and actually does Batman 'Properly'!

Yes, it's much better than what has come before and serves a purpose in allowing people to place Batman in a modern context and move him on from his camp history. In that, it's the movie equivalent to Frank Miller's extreme, scorched earth approach, but it was O'Neill and Adams Batman that was the real revolution for the character in making him the brooding, obsessed detective we know today.

I hope they leave Nolan's Batman alone and go for a more DCU Bats instead when they inevitably relaunch it in three years time.

reboot. definitely.

Time to move on to a Batman that does more than growl and use gadgets. Where's the greatest detective when you need him? He was pretty shite in these films.

Let's see what he does with Man of Steel first before we shout too much about giving him the keys to the kingdom.

It could be that WB would benefit better from standalone movies about their characters rather than integrating them in Marvel fashion mostly because whilst the heroes are iconic their personalities tend to be one-dimensional which means the interaction between them would be more Clash of the Titans than the quick wit of the Avengers. They need to dig deeper into their catalogue to find the real characters that could break out from behind the costumes (i.e. Booster Gold, Blue Beetle, Guy Gardner) but I can't see them wanting to dilute the main tentpoles of their universe.

the only redeeming feature the main characters have is the rogue's galleries that have been built up and in a sense that is where the DC have a much greater strength than Marvel. Their Icon's can pretty much be the straight men to their colourful villainous counterparts and you could still get a good movie. Bane was pretty lacklustre in TDKR because he was played straight as well and there's nothing worse than watching two cardboard cut-outs stand off against each other. At least Ra's and the Joker were entertainingly mad for different reasons.

I agree. As tempting as it is to build on something that already exists Nolan's universe is really a straightjacket for the characters rather than something that allows them to be explored fully.

It's not a place where anything is possible, only certain things with a reasonable plausibility which kind of goes against the grain of most of Batman's potential foes and conflicts.

It's very much one man's vision of how Batman could be, the equivalent of an elseworlds GN. Time to move on to the mainstream interpretation that worked so well and got so much respect in the comics and Bruce Timm's animated series, where Bruce is troubled but not really psychotic and does have relationships and friendships and can work in a team.

And get him doing some bloody detecting for once! How hard is that?

Damn bean counters. They'll most likely hold back any real progress on a full JL movie simply because they've seen the kind of box office Nolan's films did and think they can replicate the formula for other characters with stand alone stories instead of testing the wind and seeing the actual enjoyment and pleasure a lot of people had at the Avengers and moving more in that direction.

You may be able to tell I'm not a fan of Nolan's movies from my other comments below but I really did want to enjoy them. However, for me it's kind of like watching the Star Wars prequels. It was a soulless interpretation of the mythos using iconic imagery and making it mean nothing by totally missing the point of what made the characters and stories work in the first place.

I'm glad it's over now and I can forget about it (once I've stopped venting! oh how I missed not being able to comment over the last few months!). Of course I'll be in the front row of the cinema for Man of Steel in the first week but I'm really hoping Snyder takes the good things from Nolan's movies and leaves out the bad. God help us all if we get a Superman that doesn't feel like the best of us and is all flaws.

my thots exactly bro! its for the viewers to understand that despite batman quit his life, theres always a ray of hope... and that Gotham will always a guardian to take the Dark Knight's mantle.

Sponsored Links