Journal #5865

I don't think I need to look far to figure out where the design of Whiplash came from

Watch the circle light on his chest... exactly the same as iron man in the comic. Maby the guy on the photo is iron man ?

lol @Habboi: That seems possible... too possible.

According to movie Director Jon Favreau, who is making Iron Man 2, gave the following statement to Superherohype.com:

"Quote -
Whiplash sports a power pack on his chest that looks similar to the one used by Iron Man. The technologies are definitely related, and that's part of the core theme of the film. The character's alter ego, Ivan Vanko, is a Russian who, Favreau says, has constructed his own version of a suit. Among the creative alterations: a pair of whips, powered by the suit's glowing chest piece. - Unquote"

So, with that said, I guess this Ivan Vanko is like a Russian version of Tony Stark, but an evil one.

you do know, when typing, the " " marks take place of the words Quote and Unquote? Just some nifty information I came across back in elementary. =P

Thanks for the tip. Well, that's what happens to me when I type in a hurry and don't see my type'os. But hey, at least you read it.

Reply -
Please don't suck.

• unreply.

Yea, if this Marvel movie does suck, I will start to root for DC movies over Marvel then. After all, Dark Knight 2, Green Lantern, Flash, Wonder Woman and a few other DC characters are having their movies developed as we speak!

So Whiplash is a borg now, instead of a gimp?
Sounds like fun.

A gimp you say?
Please elaborate...

Elaborate -
Look at the picture you supplied.

• unelaborate.

Oh, that....

For some reason, I was thinking about the GNU Image Manipulation Program by the same name. And by the way, the "- -" way of starting the posts is only funny for about 2 or 3 times, after that, it gets old quick, just pointing it out.

Lucky that was only the second time then.

First movie is a bit overrated, but it was fun. Hopefully this is the same.

Also, Dark Knight 2, Tito? What is that, like a spin-off sequel of a sequel?

@Strider: I remember when the people behind the Batman movies said they were doing a new reboot of the Batman franchise starting with the movie that later became "Batman Begins", they pointed out it was going to be a more down to earth, less campy, darker and more human Batman set in a non-gothic looking Gotham city. Then a much more darker sequel, The Dark Knight comes along which made cinematic history on many fronts. Well, with a massive movie franchise cash cow on their hands, a Warner Bro. studios executive said this on the past Comic-Con when he was asked if the movie studio will use the title "Dark Knight 2" on the next sequel: We can neither confirm or deny the use of The Dark Knight 2 title for the next project". Uhm, yea sure....that sounds to me like they just might use it, after all, didn't the final scene of The Dark Knight movie leave some unfinished business hanging? As for your question, Strider, I think this will be more of a "The Dark Knight 3" if you consider calling the "Batman Begins" movie "The Dark Knight 1", get it?

@Strider Its an on going franchise although I highly doubt it'll be called "The Dark Knight 2". Christian Bale's IMDB page lists "An untitled batman film" in pre-production so there should be a new one.

@naserve: You might be right, Warner Bro. studios have yet to reveal the movie's eventual title. Some years ago, DC Comics published a graphic novel called The Dark Knight, the story line was set some years in to the future with an aging Batman coming out of retirement for one last mission, or something like that. I am pretty sure this is where they got the title for the last movie. Now, some time later after The Dark Knight graphic novel, DC Comics publishes another graphic novel called "The Return Of The Dark Knight". So, I say there is a possibility that they might follow the same logic and name the next Batman movie "The Return Of The Dark Knight". It does make sense, does it not?

but was the comic before it Batman Begins? =P

You know, that's a good question saw1833, but I don't think there was a comic called Batman Begins, other then the official movie adaptation comic that came afterwards. Anyway, I might have to look in to that.

I think you missed my sarcasm. And what kind of logic is that Tito, because it makes no sense to me. It'll be the 3rd film in the series... Batman 3 is the more appropriate WIP title.

Well yea, Batman 3 as you put it would be the no-brainer choice for the title. But the thing is, Batman 3 just sounds too plain, too regular and predictable. I am sure the studio execs would want to go with something more unconventional and more exiting, something with shock value and menacing. To tell you the truth, we will just have to wait and see what the studio decides, decisions like this always fluctuate and can change on the last minute.

I'm talking about a WIP title. Obviously whatever they settle on won't be simply "Batman 3", but my point is it's not The Dark Knight 2, because it's the third in the series.

it'd be second in the series of movies conveniently titled "The Dark Knight" =D

Sorry for my dumbness, but I'm not familiar with the "WIP" term, what does it exactly stands for?

You know saw1833, that's what I wanted to say all along, but for some reason, I could not spit it out right.

Work In Progress

annnnddd....

I was just being a jackass, that was your goal too?

Work In Progress it is, okay then.

Just being a jackass? No, not really, just what I wanted to say...that the Batman Begins movie being pretty much a stand alone movie as far as story wise, so the third movie might be called The Dark Knight 2, since it might and should tie up the loose ends of The Dark Knight movie.

How can you call Begins standalone when there aren't enough other movies in the series to compare it to? The Dark Knight is a sequel, it follows on from where the last left off. The third will do the same.

Did The Dark Knight really leave any more loose ends than Begins did? By the end of the first the villians are all either dead or incarcerated, the manor is destroyed and Wayne's future is uncertain. By the end of the second the villians are again either dead or incarcerated, and Batman's sacrificed his status for the good of the public. They both tie up in a way that leaves you satisfied, but easily leaving room for progression.

Look Strider, you really have some good points there and I agree with you on most of them, but on the Dark Knight ending, both major villains (Joker and Two Face) are still alive, none died, they were just captured. Now, I am not counting the mobsters and henchmen on this observation, they are just small potatoes to bother with. And knowing that Joker and Two Face are guaranteed to escape jail, being that they are super villains after all, I consider that a big loose end, bigger than the one from Batman Begins, where the major villain did died.

Okay look, I am just going by the way DC Comics handles Batman and it's progression of titles over the years. DC had a comic book called The Dark Knight, and that's a fact. That Dark Knight comic had a sequel called The Return Of The Dark Knight. So, if they don't use Dark Knight 2 or 3 for the next movie, then for sure they might follow DC Comic's logical lead and name it The Return Of The Dark Knight.

Also, there's another twist to the next Batman movie I forgot to mention. According to what director Chris Nolan said in a MTV interview, part of the next Batman movie's story line will involve the mention and tie-in of certain other DC Comic characters, and the same thing will be done on the next Superman movie (WIP: "Superman: Man of Steel"), which is slated to start shooting soon. You see, all this was planed out to get the ball rolling for the planed Justice League movie scheduled for a 2012 shoot. "It all part of the plan", He,he,he.

Nah, Two-Face is dead, Nolan confirmed it and said it to Eckhardt himself. Joker was originally planned to return for the 3rd movie, but it's looking highly unlikely now following Heath's death.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand how sharing the name of one of the comics in any way implies the next one is going to be The Dark Knight 2 or 3. It makes no sense. Return of The Dark Knight sounds like a possibility, but it is still the 3rd part of the trilogy/series, not a "sequel of a sequel".

Why are we still going on about this...

Yes, let's put an end to it, 30 posts on a journal is enough. Thanks for everybody else who commented. You got the last say, Strider.