The Dark Knight Rises

Kinda sounds like the guy just wants to be in the next film. Doubt he will be, though.

Cillian Murphy Talks Batman 3


When asked about Batman 3 Murphy wasn’t able to bring details to light, but appeared willing to reprise his Scarecrow role if given the opportunity. “It’s not for me to start campaigning for the Scarecrow to come back but if Chris wants me back in that role, yeah, absolutely, I would love to do it…”
Murphy left Total Film with some encouraging words on what is sure to be something special. “In this age of 3D and phenomenal special effects, we tend to be a little inured to big movies, like, ‘Whatever…’ But Chris is really going to challenge that with Inception. I don’t doubt it.”

__________________
You looked but you didn't see

please dont do the next film in 3d.

Im with you LuD but seeing how Hollywood are using this 3D rubbish for everything I can see this being 3D aswell I hope not but we will see...

__________________

~In the event of a Zombie Uprising, remember to sever the head or destroy the brain!~

I think Nolan will resist.

At least, I hope so...

i think if he wanted 3d it would been used in inception to test it.
what would be kool is to have it fully IMAX but i read somewhere that it would be an absolute bother due to what Chris Nolan wants to film so maybe like int eh Dark Knight hvae the long pan shots.

but yea NO 3D

I really can't see this being in 3D. It doesn't need the promotion.

It's not that it would be a bother per say....

1. There aren’t enough real IMAX venues to make it worth it. Sure, IMAX is great — but when it comes to making a heavy duty blockbuster movie, a studio is going to look for the biggest bang for its buck. Currently, that doesn’t necessarily apply to IMAX. As of June of 2009, there were just over 300 IMAX-capable venues in over 42 countries. There are over 29,000 screens in the United States alone. It is unknown (at least to Google) how much it costs to take IMAX film and downconvert for a 35mm projection system, but I doubt that it’s cheap. Therefore, the studio — in this case, Warner Bros. — would be required to shell out extra money just to put its movie in regular theaters. Not exactly the sort of move studios jump to make.

2. It is just too expensive. Estimates place the cost of production — including the time it takes to move cameras, build custom rigs, change reels, as well as the heightened cost of materials — in the range of 50-100% higher than that of standard film production. Those sequences we all enjoyed in 2008’s episode of the Batman saga could have cost upwards of 2x more than other sequences in the film. To shoot an entire movie in this fashion, even with cost-saving advancements and aggressive innovation, could still drive the film’s production north of $300 million. And despite the fact that The Dark Knight brought in almost $1 billion worldwide at the box office, it doesn’t make sense to push production costs on the next one that high. For WB, it is a simple decision: spend $300 million and hope you make that $1 billion again, bringing in $700 million in profit (marketing and other undisclosed costs aside). Or make a third movie for $185 million (the reported budget of TDK) and possibly bring in another $915 million in profit.

3. Box office success is not guaranteed. With The Dark Knight, there were other factors impacting its box office take, including the death of star Heath Ledger in the year leading up to the film’s release. Say what you want about how much it did or didn’t impact the numbers. It did have an effect on the film’s success. People went out to see his epic final performance, a posthumous Oscar worthy performance. That will draw crowds. As well, there is a statistical trend working against a third movie — third movies traditionally don’t do as well as their predecessors. For example:

• Terminator 3 cost $100 million more than T2, and made $50 million less.
• Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End cost $75 million more than Dead Man’s Chest, and grossed $115 million less domestically.

There are obvious exceptions to this rule, including The Bourne Ultimatum (which added $50 million to the box office take of The Bourne Supremacy) and The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (which bested The Two Towers by $38 million). But both of these are incremental increases. And neither of these saw a major rise in production cost. Not to the tune of 50-100% more, that’s for sure. Put simply, the risk would be too high for Warner Bros. to sink all that money into IMAX.

Source: Film School Rejects

Same here Yoda mate

I agree with Kaiser, if Nolan was going to do this in 3D then im sure he would of tested it in Inception. Nolan *fingers crossed* wont bother with this 3D fad.

Man, it sucks that Joker can't be around anymore. Imagine what cool stuff they can do with him. They can't even replace the actor, because no one can't do what heath ledger did with that character.

sadly he was that good, i dont know if they would dare try and re-cast
its stuff like this that will take attention away from Marvel films

I hope they wouldnt DARE try and re-cast the joker, there is NO way anyone can replace Heath Ledger his performance as the Joker is just immense

Yup, Heath's performance is unrepeatable.Anyway I wouldn't call it daring because I have full faith in Chris Nolan and his choice on that subject.
Although, I can still bet there might be some short appearance of the Joker.
It's all within the right hands

If we see the Joker at all, it'll be in some roundabout or semi-hidden fashion. Shadows, off-screen, a voice from previously recorded (but unused) dialogue. But nothing involving recasting or genuinely reintroducing the character.

couldn't agree more

Thats does sound like a major possibility also very awesome idea.

I wouldn't mind the next installment adapted from the Frank Miller older batman (The Dark Knight Returns). Hmmm... On second thought, maybe the 4th movie. People need to be prepared. If #3 is a hugh success, #4 can be anything creative. Hopefully.

__________________
- Noah: Journey of the Volunteer :: Sci-fi adventure webcomic
- Comics by Rono :: Graphic novels, comics, strips and other images

well with a 4th it could go any direction as Christopher Nolan will not be directing it.
i am glad he's staying for a 3rd, and hopefullt have a batman superhero Trilogy we can be proud of.

this flick better be darker, suspenseful and with a surprise ending that will keep this franchise alive for another decade or so until someone botches it up.

Christopher Nolan Says He Is Not Attached to Direct Batman 3 (Yet)


Comic book movie fans were overjoyed when it was announced that the director of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight (TDK), Christopher Nolan, was chosen by Warner Bros. to "godfather" the reboot of the Superman franchise. But, as great as that news was, fans really wanted to know whether Nolan would be returning as director of Batman 3, something he has been elusive about since before TDK was even in theaters. Unfortunately, Nolan is still playing coy, saying in the most recent issue of Empire Magazine (via ComicBookMovie) that he still has not signed a deal to direct Batman 3.

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 [Inception], I'm only capable of doing that, so my head will continue to be firmly in this movie for the next few months.

However, considering Nolan's brother, Jonathan Nolan, is writing the screenplay for Batman 3, it's almost a foregone conclusion that he will be returning to direct.

My brother, Jonathan, is working on the screenplay. We came up with a story that we are very exited about. We particularly like where we are taking the characters and what the ending is. There are things for me to be very exited about in addressing the characters again, but ultimately it always comes down to the script, and can we make a great film from this? Thats something I will firmly be turning my attention to figuring out fairly soon. [This film will be] the ending of a story rather than infinitely blowing up the balloon and expanding the story.

Marvel Studios has set up their superhero movies as part of a shared "Marvel Cinematic Universe," where characters and concepts freely cross over from movie to movie. This strategy has been embraced by the fans, but based on Nolan's statements, it's unlikely that we will be seeing Superman and Batman crossing over with one another, even given Nolan's involvement with both franchises.

Marvel are doing what they are doing and people will either respond to that really well or they won't. Its not something I ever applied a blanket rule to, but Marvel characters are very different to 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/Superman?' And for me a big part of that is their individuality. They are extraordinary beings in an ordinary world. ...they are 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 onto that in my imagining of them.

Another hotly-discussed Batman 3 topic in the fan community is what villain or villains will be squaring off against Batman in the new movie. Obviously, Nolan wouldn't divulge this information, but he did say that Mr. Freeze, the character portrayed by Arnold Schwarzenegger in Batman & Robin would definitely not be appearing in Batman 3. Some have speculated that the Joker might return, either via CGI technology or with another actor — many have noted the resemblance between the late Heath Ledger and Joseph Gordon-Levitt — in the role, but Nolan denied this and said that he didn't "feel comfortable talking about it."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
source:http://www.reelzchannel.com/movie-ne...t-batman-3-yet