Question about the ending to The Dark Knight (2008).

Tools    





Put yourself in the shoes of the characters, who know a fraction of what the audience does. More than that, remember that they're people and not robots, and consider the context the movie spends like two hours giving us:

The public, and the police, are scared and angry. The only things they know for sure is that Batman is a violent vigilante, and that he refused to show himself and let someone die.

Dent tries to talk people down, encourage them to be rational and reasonable, and one of the officers in the crowd yells "NO MORE DEAD COPS!" and people cheer.

So what are they going to think when the DA, who they adore, turns up dead, and a hero cop says he saw Batman do it? What are they going to be primed to believe? Is it going to be that one of their heroes is lying, and that the other snapped and embraced chaotic nihilism, or is it going to be that the weirdo coward in the bat costume beating the crap out of people was responsible? You know, the second weirdo in as many weeks to show up in a bizarre costume and start murdering?
__________________



"Money won is twice as sweet as money earned."



I just want to hug (your FACE)!
And yeah, the movie ended before they could do anything about it anyway. Time ran out. Even if you count the time it took for credits to roll, there was too much chaos for anyone to even consider the matter.











Oh okay, I thought that they set up Gotham city as cops and mobsters being murdered all the time, that murder was so common that therefore, no scapegoat would be needed, cause everyone's doing it as the saying goes.
If the murdered person was just some dude, sure. But it's the Distract Attorney for crying out loud.



I wonder if questions like this come from detective shows, where they always investigate everything equally as thoroughly, always test for prints and DNA, blah blah. Real life isn't like that. In real life resources are limited and the people in charge have to decide what to focus on.



Put yourself in the shoes of the characters, who know a fraction of what the audience does. More than that, remember that they're people and not robots, and consider the context the movie spends like two hours giving us:

The public, and the police, are scared and angry. The only things they know for sure is that Batman is a violent vigilante, and that he refused to show himself and let someone die.

Dent tries to talk people down, encourage them to be rational and reasonable, and one of the officers in the crowd yells "NO MORE DEAD COPS!" and people cheer.

So what are they going to think when the DA, who they adore, turns up dead, and a hero cop says he saw Batman do it? What are they going to be primed to believe? Is it going to be that one of their heroes is lying, and that the other snapped and embraced chaotic nihilism, or is it going to be that the weirdo coward in the bat costume beating the crap out of people was responsible? You know, the second weirdo in as many weeks to show up in a bizarre costume and start murdering?
Yes if Dent's dead body was found there will be public outcry, but if the body were to not be found, I didn't think people would have that outcry and they would assume that someone else killed Dent.

The mayor in the movie said that Dent is going to have a lot of enemies now, and everyone is going to come after him now, so I thought that any one of those people could be blamed rather than Batman.

Gordon could even say in a press conference, that hundreds of criminals associated with the mob had motivation to kill Dent. Isn't that just as believable for the public?

This is the part I have trouble wrapping my head around cause Dent is the most wanted man by the mafia, besides Batman, so why would anyone have any trouble that someone else other than Batman would have killed him?



I just want to hug (your FACE)!
Also if the common attitude is that "it happens all the time" (not just a catchy, crappy country song), then why bother with a legit investigation? You just defeated your own argument.



Also if the common attitude is that "it happens all the time" (not just a catchy, crappy country song), then why bother with a legit investigation? You just defeated your own argument.
I was asking those on here, who believed there would be an investigation if Batman didn't take the blame, is what I meant. If we are going by the investigation theory.



Yes if Dent's dead body was found there will be public outcry, but if the body were to not be found, I didn't think people would have that outcry and they would assume that someone else killed Dent.

The mayor in the movie said that Dent is going to have a lot of enemies now, and everyone is going to come after him now, so I thought that any one of those people could be blamed rather than Batman.

Gordon could even say in a press conference, that hundreds of criminals associated with the mob had motivation to kill Dent. Isn't that just as believable for the public?



They could do that.
But they didn't.


Gordon even says "You can't, you're NOT!"
Batman's reply: "I'm whatever Gotham needs me to be"


It's Batman's burden to bear.
If Gordon pinned Dent's death on some random criminal, or even on a crime boss... they're framing an innocent person.
Batman chooses to bear this burden. To be the thing that Gotham needs to survive.


And as YN said, Batman then vanishes without a trace... leaving the case open, and the criminal charges remain standing against him.
As far as Batman and Gordon know right now, the case will forever be open, and justice against someone whose identity is secret, will never be brought.
It leaves Gotham, the People, with their perfect White Knight who fought against crime and died at the hands of a vigilante.
Dent becomes a martyr... and his almost perfect way of fighting crime becomes a staple for law and justice in Gotham.


But, as Yoda said, in TDKR, Bane blows the whole thing wide open.



I answered that already:

If the District Attorney mysteriously vanishes, they'll have to investigate thoroughly. When tragedy strikes, people demand answers. Giving them one--even a false one--is a lot more likely to put an end to questions than "hey, it could've been anything!"
"The vigilante coward did it" is an answer. "One of these non-specific guys did" is not.



If Gordon pinned Dent's death on some random criminal, or even on a crime boss... they're framing an innocent person.
Well I didn't think that that Gordon had to pin it on a specific person, but since the mafia wanted Dent dead, I thought the police and people would come to the conclusion that it was the mafia who most likely killed them, since they had the biggest motive to. So a specific person who not be blamed, but the mafia organization in general.

Why is it that the public would not assume it was the Mafia, who had the biggest motive? Why would they have trouble believing that over Batman?



Sorry for repeating it, I guess I just have trouble with not knowing why the people wouldn't just assume it was the mafia who killed Dent since they had the biggest motive.



I just want to hug (your FACE)!
Well I didn't think that that Gordon had to pin it on a specific person, but since the mafia wanted Dent dead, I thought the police and people would come to the conclusion that it was the mafia who most likely killed them, since they had the biggest motive to. So a specific person who not be blamed, but the mafia organization in general.
Same outcome though. The public, after all the terrorism that was inflicted on the citizens of Gotham, would likely not be satisfied just pointing an accusatory finger at the mob. They would more likely want justice. I mean pitchforks and torches here. So that loops back to requiring an investigation because what mob boss would just sit idly by without defending himself by way of an investigation? Given the TRUTH of the matter, a crime boss would have a field day discovering what really happened! Why would anyone (writer, director, actor, or character in a movie) even consider that as a possibility?

These questions are brought up and then the investigative process stops immediately. If you're going to create a question (in order to solve it), why not take the next two or three logical steps and troubleshoot it first? A lot of these questions immediately hit a wall once you take them to their next logical conclusions. Follow through on what you're asking and play it out based on evidence you have, the evidence the CHARACTERS's have (in absence of your awareness as a audience member), and then draw a reasonable conclusion from that comparison. Sure, YOU can see around the corner of a movie set because you're watching it from the luxury of a theater presentation. The characters, however, cannot because they can only see what is within the limits of their purview.
__________________
"My Dionne Warwick understanding of your dream indicates that you are ambivalent on how you want life to eventually screw you."
- Joel

"Ever try to forcibly pin down a house cat? It's not easy."
- Captain Steel



I just want to hug (your FACE)!
It's not "why the people wouldn't believe it." Clearly, they would. The problem is that would create a legit investigation because unlike martyr-bats, a crime boss ain't just gonna sit quietly for a probable death penalty.



Oh okay I thought that people thinking it was the mob would have been satisfied, since the mob was to blame why all this chaos started in the first place. So I thought the people would be satisfied at turning the blame to route, of what caused it all.

And I know Gordon is not the audience in the movie, but you think that from Gordon's point of view, he knows that the mob is Dent's biggest enemy, and that the people would place the blame on the route cause most likely, or so I thought.



I just want to hug (your FACE)!
Sure. That's reasonable. Right up until you take the next logical step by asking, "wouldn't the mob defend themselves in a court of law?" Then the next question must be, "Wouldn't their defense attorney demand an investigation?"



Oh well I just thought since Gordon doesn't have any real evidence, it turn into a cold case, and no one would actually be prosecuted for Harvey's murder. The people believe that the mob got away with it, instead of Batman, but at least feel they know it was the mob that did it, and would believe that instead.



You’re forgetting he was a “witness”. No one would think to question the commissioner, especially one as as decorated as Gordon if he claims he witnessed it.



If you want a real life comparison look at the Las Vegas massacre - thousands of unanswered questions; multiple conflicting timelines; people's cell phones confiscated & returned with data deleted; cell phones confiscated & never returned; dozens of reports of multiple shooters & shootings occurring up to an hour after the first shots began in different parts of the city; several witnesses claiming multiple shooters suddenly dying in weird & mysterious ways days after they spoke out; wacky witnesses leaving the country after allegedly being wounded then showing up on "Ellen" and being fed a contradictory script regarding the timeline by the show's producers; contradictory explanations (we know he acted alone and we claim 100% surety of this only hours after the incident before a thorough investigation could even begin) even though terrorist groups are claiming he was their affiliate; - later, "he could not have acted alone!"; one of the broken windows in the hotel was in the room of a different guest; authorities stating, we know he was not associated with anyone or communicating with anyone - but his hard drive was missing from his computer so we have no idea who he could've been associated with or in touch with!)...

Now, consider all that, but 2 months after the single largest gun massacre in U.S. history virtually all media coverage just stops, reports on all investigation goes virtually silent, a sinlge explanation (still with all the conflicting info I just mentioned hanging out there) is given which explains absolutely nothing, then it's all swept under the rug - all investigation ceases, it's hardly ever mentioned and, almost hypnotically, the entire incident seems largely eliminated from the public consciousness like it never even happened.

So, if that could happen in real life, then no major indepth investigation into the explanation that "Batman killed Dent" is not hard to believe!