CelticsStrong
Other Discussions => Entertainment => Off Topic => Movies => Topic started by: nickagneta on July 18, 2008, 08:45:29 AM
-
I saw The Dark Knight at the midnight showing last night and have to say....I am freaking dragging this morning.
After watching the coming attractions(which included a 30 second, not too much detail trailer of the next Terminator movie), watching the movie for an hour and 45 minutes, at which point the theatre had a malfunction and the movie got stuck for about 10-15 minutes, had the air conditioning go out in the theatre, and then watched the rest of the last 45 minutes of the film while sweating to death and then drove home, ...I'm really tired.
The film itself was an excellent story with some pretty predictable twists and turns but entertaining, for a total of 2 hours. Unfortunately the film was 2 1/2 hours long. It was just too long and for periods lost my attention because it was too long.
ATTENTION: Spoilers coming go back if you don't want to know!!
The whole Batman having a massive spying computer was not necessary to good storytelling and the entire two ships on the harbor, let's see who blows up who, stunk. Just boring stuff that didn't need to be in the movie in order to just turn Harvey into Two-Face.
I do have to give credit that Heath Ledger and Christian Bale did not disappoint. There's something about that Joker role that brings out the best in actors, or maybe the worst, and Ledger was brilliant. Sociopathic, psychotic, intelligent, humorous, and entertaining to watch all roled up into a single package. Bale is also the best Batman ever and was great once again.
Ledger's walking out of Gotham General Hospital in a white nurse's dress, makeup, and playing with the malfunctioning explosive switch was unbelievably funny. He also had some typical Schwarzenagger one liners that were of the charts. My favorite was "You won't kill me because you can't and I won't kill you because you're too much fun." Excellent.
Couple of last points.
They didn't bring Katie Holmes back and Maggie Gyllenhall is without a doubt one of the most unglamourous, ugly actresses in Hollywood. And it showed. She was worse than Holmes was in Batman Begins and parts of the theatre kinda cheered when they killed her off.
Two-Face's make-up job was unreal.
I thought another great comedic spot in the film was when a Wayne Industries employee discovers who Batman is and goes to Fox demanding $10 million a year for the rest of his life. Fox retorts with "It is your belief that the owner of this company, a billionaire playboy, is an outlaw vigillante who enjoys going out at night and beating up deadly criminals with his bare hands and it is your desire to blackmail him? Let me know how that works out for you." Or something to that effect.
Overall 4 stars out of five. Kill 20-25 minutes with good editting and a script change or two and it was 5 stars out of 5.
-
Nick,
As soon as I saw the red line in your post I stopped reading!! Going today at noon.
The son of a guy I work with went last night and texted his dad the following reveiw
“The only complaint I have is that I didn’t see it in Imax. I loved that it was 2 hour and a half hours long and never has the phrase “pulse pounding from start to end” been more true.
I also thought that every critic (raving about) Ledger would take away from him, but he was better than they said. I wanna be the joker. I have found a new career path.”
I cannot wait to go.
-
If this movie had no hype, I would have said very good movie... but this movie does not live up to the hype IMO. Still a good flick though.
Very entertaining, but quite formulaeic and EXTREMELY predictable.
Ledger was really good. I think he met expectations, but all told, this movie fell short of what I felt would have and could have been a classic.
I would give it probably a 7 out of 10, and say that the first one was a 9. Again though, alot of this is due to the hype... I guess I was expecting greatness from this movie and it just never quite got there for me.
Definitely worth seeing though.
-
It was like I was lifted up to heaven, saw the face of God and he said "Champzilla, you are my greatest creation".
-
TDK is probably the most ambitious super-hero movie ever in terms of how much it tries to do and it almost entirely succeeds. Ledger is also incredible as the Joker.
However, there's so much story moving at such blinding speed that it might just wear people out.
Bale's scary Batman voice is also ridiculous. Kevin Conroy did the two-voice thing brilliantly on the animated series, but ever time Bale's Batman opened his mouth I expected some character to say "Oh, come on!"
Mike
-
Wow kind of surprised with some of your responses.
I got to see a pre-screening of it since I work for TW.
I thought it was a 5* movie and Ledger will get a posthumous Oscar. He was so creepy that every seen he was in made me cringe. I loved the spying aspect of the movie which obviously was take on how our Government sacrifices some civil liberties in the name of justice. The Dark Knight is very dark...........
The movie has so many layers.
-
Unfortunately, I have to wait till Monday to see it in IMax. Sounds like most of the reviews are positive though. I can't remember hearing so much hype about a comic book movie since the first Spiderman.
At least I know this Batman will be better than "Batman & Robin" that was on last night. That movie is awful!
-
I loved it. Just awesome. I'll be looking for rumors of a sequel.
-
I thought it was awesome. A couple things:
1. I wish 2 Face wasn't killed off already. I did not imagine he would look that insane, an absolutely crazy character. I mean, he should be around longer just doing crazy 2 Face things (you know like flipping coins and killing people.)
2. How can they make another movie? There is no way that there could be another villain who could be as insane and twisted as Ledger's Joker. I figure the best way to follow this movie up would be to have The Joker in jail and have a Silence of the Lambs kind of thing going on, but the The Joker can't be brought back. You can't replace Ledger, he was just too good.
Side note: I want to know the person who works for WB and suggested Ledger as the Joker. He deserves a medal for that casting job. Greatest Joker ever, even better than Hamill!
Question: What villain could be put in the next movie that can maintain the darkness of the previous 2? I could only think of the Mad Hatter
-
Spoiler
Nolan got it just right with this one. This film had a lot of elements that ruin other comic book movies, but in this case it enhanced them
Usually I hate CGI, because film makers are lazy and have no problem making movies that look half real action, half animated. In Dark Knight, all the special effects blend in perfectly.
Couple that with a fast moving plot, and at no point did I stop and think to myself "oh yeah, this is just a movie".
Even the little comic bits added to my enjoyment of the film.
I knew it was going to be classic at soon as Joker made the pen disappear.
My only problems were Katie Holmes replacement kind of sucked, and when Batman talks sometimes it sounds like he's holding his nose. That's minor stuff though.
I've heard there's going to be another one, but what's the point? Two Face is dead, the guy who plays Joker is dead....someone who's more into comics help me out
Please no Mr. Freeze
-
I loved it. Just awesome. I'll be looking for rumors of a sequel.
This is a sequel.
-
I thought the Dark Knight was a great movie of course it was predictable what super hero movie isn't but unlike spider man 3 and the Hulk this had some pretty good turns.. And Ledger was incredible it is crazy how you can go from ten things i hate about you to the Joker just outstanding!
-
This thread is already loaded with Spoilers so I'll just speak freely on it.
I thought it was [dang] good. I think it might be a tad overhyped. That seems to happen when pretty much every single review is off the charts. The doesn't mean the movie isn't great, but I think it's possible for someone to be slightly disappointed if they were expecting a mind blowing experience.
In fact, as I was typing this my friend just texted me: "liked it but i think all the hype made my expectations a little high". So I think a little people might end up liking it, but being a little disappointed it isn't "The Godfather".
Ledger carried it for the most part. He was great. He definitely nailed the Joker role. Nolan has already stated that he thinks of this series as a trilogy and I kinda figured Joker would come back in some way for the 3rd. I'm not sure what they will do with him now. I guess it's not possible to recast him, right? Although I was reading some Batman forum and they brought something up. Apparently immediately after Ledger's death, Johnny Depp said he was willing to finish Ledger's scenes in the movie. Obviously the movie was already finished so maybe Depp was unaware of this at the time. Would that mean a guy like Depp would be willing to step in for a tiny (but possibly necessary) cameo in the 3rd? I dunno. And now that I think about it, it's possible that the info I was reading on that forum was inaccurate and they were actually just talking about "The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus" (the film Ledger was filming when he died). From wiki: ". Ledger's role was recast with Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell portraying physically changed transformations of Ledger's character as he travels through dimensions. The projected release date for this film is 2009.". That might make a bit more sense. It's sad that Ledger passed away, though. At the end his Joker says to Batman something along the lines of, "I think we can do this forever" and I'd love to have him back.
I can understand some of the nitpicking things like Batman's voice being lame. I just figure he uses the gruff ridiculous voice to mask his identity. Otherwise you'd figure someone would go, "Hey you happen to sound just like Bruce Wayne". Especially people who know him personally like Harvey Dent. His overly gruff voice is about the same as using a voice modulator or something.
Someone mentioned not liking the boat scene and calling it "unnecessary". I disagree. It was the key part of the movie. One of the main things The JOker was trying to prove is that anyone can end up like him if pushed... and that everyone deep down is morally f'd up. He fully expected them to blow each other up... (side note, but... did anyone think to themselves that maybe JOker was sick in the head enough to lie to the passengers... and that instead of blowing up the OTHER boat they would actually be blowing up their selves? I totally figure he'd do that. I expected the big black convict to flip the switch and watch his boat blow to hell). Joker also kept pushing Batman trying to bring him down to his level and abandon his morals. You can see Joker's glee and excitement as he believes he's plummeting to his death... laughing maniacally as he falls... only to be disappointed when he realizes Batman will not let him die. Joker may have been victorious with showing Harvey Dent's dark side, but not proving the people of Gotham were hopeless. Boat scene had to be in there.
Another poster just mentioned that he felt the surveillance technology thing was unnecessary. There was a little social commentary there about our current government obviously... about how much privacy we should give up for our security. But it was also a cool way to give batman some white eyeballs (like in the comics) and incorporate bat-like sonar. So whatever. I was cool with it.
Not sure who they could have for the sequel. How could they market it? They didn't really make it clear if Two-Face is dead or not, although it was sorta implied. I guess the obvious thing they could do would be to reinterpret the Riddler as more of like a Zodiac killer who leaves clues. Nolan supposedly said he wants there to be a female villain in the 3rd one, but I really don't think Catwoman would fit into this universe. And I'm pretty sure Nolan already ruled out Catwoman. There had also been some mentions that they weren't planning on using characters who had already appeared in comics. I'm not really sure what they'll do. I think maybe it would work for them to incorporate Talia al Ghul ... and then midway through Ra's al Ghul could return. They never really showed Liam Neeson die in the first one. Again, it was implied with the train crashing, but the guy is just as crafty as Batman... they wouldn't need the lazarus pit to explain his survival. He's a freakin Ninja god... I guess that would tie together the three movies nicely.
Overall... [dang] good movie. Just warn your friends not to be overhyped. I was just talking to someone about it who was asking my impression. I loved the first one. I was one of the few people who was dumb enough not to see the twist coming in advance that Liam Neeson was the real Ra's al Ghul. I loved the origin story. I think maybe my only problem with the Dark Knight is that i've been obsessing over it for several months and I saw every twist coming in advance. Partially, because I'd obsessed over the movie and partially, because the comic history is so well known that some things were obvious. Spoiler Lightning Round: I knew Rachel Dawes was going to bite it. I don't think anyone was surprised to see Jim Gordon survive. I don't think anyone was surprised to see Harvey Dent turning into Two-Face. And I had seen enough clips to know what to expect from Ledger's joker. This isn't the movie's fault... the movie was fantastic... but it definitely might leave some people feeling like it was overhyped. I suggest telling your friends that if they liked "Batman Begins" they'll love this one as well... that's sufficient.
-
I thought the Dark Knight was a great movie of course it was predictable what super hero movie isn't but unlike spider man 3 and the Hulk this had some pretty good turns.. And Ledger was incredible it is crazy how you can go from ten things i hate about you to the Joker just outstanding!
That's partially what I'm talking about. For someone who knew what to expect... it's going to be predictable. I think I'll take my dad to see it at Imax next week and he'll probably appreciate some of the plot "twist" elements of the movie more than I possibly could. Someone who doesn't even know who Harvey Dent is... or doesn't realize that Rachel Dawes was merely a character created by Christopher Nolan. I figure it will be a lot more shocking and rewarding for a guy who doesn't know what to expect. The "predictability" is partially due to knowing the source material and knowing what to expect from the film.
-
Dude of course there is a sequel, Christian Bial signed like a 3 movie deal, thats not new information.
-
Blew me away.
Only complaint was there were points were the music drowned out the script.
Literally had me cringing, laughing and sitting on the edge of my seat.
I have to see it again at the IMAX.
-
As for the next film in the series I say go sign Leonardo DiCaprio or Sasha Baron Cohen to play the Riddler and make the Riddler a villianous OCD special assasin/cleaner/problem solver that the Mob hires to not kill Batman, but to frame Batman and then expose him.
A simplistic idea but my sons and I got to the theatre early and struck up a convo with a couple of guys about who and how the could work the Riddler in in the next movie.
I've decided that the malfunction and bad atmosphere in the theatre last night might have tempered my enthusiasm for the last part of the film so I'm going to go back and rewatch it in Imax.
-
As for the next film in the series I say go sign Leonardo DiCaprio or Sasha Baron Cohen to play the Riddler and make the Riddler a villianous OCD special assasin/cleaner/problem solver that the Mob hires to not kill Batman, but to frame Batman and then expose him.
A simplistic idea but my sons and I got to the theatre early and struck up a convo with a couple of guys about who and how the could work the Riddler in in the next movie.
I've decided that the malfunction and bad atmosphere in the theatre last night might have tempered my enthusiasm for the last part of the film so I'm going to go back and rewatch it in Imax.
rumor has it the accountant who knows Batman's identity is lined up to be the Riddler.
-
I don't plan to see it.
-
This was by far my favorite super hero movie. I'd actually give it a 5 out of 5 stars, and I am a very harsh movie critic, especially of "blockbusters". (I'm quite the snob, actually)
Firstly, because the writing for the joker was excellent and Heath Ledger pulled off the character as I never hoped. He was convincingly crazy. Not typical hollywood CUCKOO CUCKOO crazy, or I-hurt-people-because-I'm-evil crazy. He seemed like a legitimate psychopath. Heath Ledger managed to portray the Joker as when he was at his absolute best (ex: the killing joke). I was not a fan of Heath Ledger's but after seeing this movie I find myself actually a little saddened he can't act in the future. His Joker is possibly, in my opinion, the greatest portrayal of a psychopathic villain in a film (of course, temper this by the fact that I was the movie about 18 hours ago... let's see if it stands the test of time).
Probably my favorite aspect of his portrayal was how unfunny I thought he was. He was saying dialogue that was written humourous, but his inflections and facial expressions made it the opposite. I was a little peeved at people laughing at every single joke - not sure if I'm being an elitist but I got the feeling they were giving the cheap laugh to something that wasn't made to be funny. It was the complexity of the dialogue and performance that these were funny jokes, told in an unfunny manner. I think some people didn't get that. (EDIT - yeah, I do sound like an elitist).
Secondly, Christian Bale continued to impress showing Batman as he was written by Frank Miller, at his best - truly dark and brooding, but a hero.
The plot moved at a good clip, the action scenes were entertaining, and the small touches really made it work (come on... the diversion was a fire truck--- on fire! perfect joker!). The jokes were a bit too much, but they were honestly funny.
I would complain that at many times the dialogue was more than a little ham-handed with two-face pretty much narrating his downfall.
I can't wait to buy it on DVD and decide if this movie can crack my top 20 all timers... I'm optimistic.
As far as the sequel - it's very sad we can't see another Joker. As good as, for example, Johnny Depp is, he could not follow up this portrayal. They would be foolish to incorporate him.
I think the best option would be The Riddler, as characters like Mr. Freeze or Poison Ivy don't really fit into this realistic portrayal. The Riddler seems a natural choice. I hope it isn't catwoman I can't see her working in these versions... nor the penguin, really, not unless they completely changed his character. I remember Rad Al Ghul had a daughter in the comic books, that might work. And I wouldn't put it past anyone to bring Two-face back.
Side note - I kind of wish they hadn't made scare-crow into sort of a "b level" villain in these films. He has the capability to be an awesome villain.
Bane is a distinct possibility, but I never liked his character myself. I hope it is The Riddler (thought - per the rumor post, I don't think the accountant could be recast... these films draw far too big name stars for their main roles, and I have no idea who played the accountant).
WOW... long post... I really loved this film.
-
As for the next film in the series I say go sign Leonardo DiCaprio or Sasha Baron Cohen to play the Riddler and make the Riddler a villianous OCD special assasin/cleaner/problem solver that the Mob hires to not kill Batman, but to frame Batman and then expose him.
A simplistic idea but my sons and I got to the theatre early and struck up a convo with a couple of guys about who and how the could work the Riddler in in the next movie.
I've decided that the malfunction and bad atmosphere in the theatre last night might have tempered my enthusiasm for the last part of the film so I'm going to go back and rewatch it in Imax.
rumor has it the accountant who knows Batman's identity is lined up to be the Riddler.
You know I kinda believe this already. I don't think the Riddler will be done as a guy in a green suit. They could almost do the 3rd film as more focused on Batman's detective abilities and make the whole thing a mystery. Some people have already mentioned.... MR. Reese = Mysteries. The accountant could very well end up being The Riddler. But did we just blow the climax of the 3rd film?... not sure. I wouldn't rule it out though.
-
Schupac ... those funny parts were funny. I'm not sure why you felt they weren't. He had several one-liners that were intended to be funny and a lot of his behavior is dark humor. I agree that he was excellent though.
And it seems that most of the negative feedback is about Christian Bale and his sorta ridiculous Batman voice.
-
despite Bale's voice, this was the best comic book movie ever! That's actually pretty significant given recent films like Iron Man, Spider-Man, and X-Men...
-
The Dark Knight was a great movie. 4 stars out of 4, easy. I hate to lump it into a "comic book movie", but I'd say it's easily the best comic book movie ever. I loved Batman Begins, but The Dark Knight movie had so much more to it. And the reason for that was the villains had more to them than Begins did. While I love the characters Ra's al Ghul, Carmine Falcone, and Scarecrow, they didn't have as much detail and resonance that Ledger's Joker or Eckhart's Two-Face had during Dark Knight.
While the pace/storylines sometimes seemed too frenetic, overall it worked greatly. There were so many layers to this movie and the acting was top-notch. Ledger deserves an Oscar nod and this crap about him getting it because he died is nonsense. Ledger's Joker is the Joker. I think his performance trumped Nicholson's by a mile, and I thought Jack was a great Joker, by the way. So I see no possible way the Joker role can be reprised. So that leaves a few problems for a 3rd film. Nolan has said repeatedly that his vision will be a trilogy, but with Ledger's death & no Joker, and Two-Face's death(there's no way that his death is implied, Two-Face is dead, funeral and all) what can be done for a 3rd film? Making a 3rd one could be impossible because how can Nolan top Dark Knight? I see a couple scenarios.
1.Center the story around The Riddler. I've seen some rumors and even posts on this site that the accountant will become The Riddler, which I think is ridiculous and people are reading too much into that. The Riddler will be portrayed by a big-time actor. I think Daniel Day Lewis would be a superb Riddler and has the type of acting ability where he could easily put up a Ledger-type performance that would help with the absence of Joker. Maybe Riddler uses Reese's knowledge in his plots and schemes. That's the only way I see Reese being used in the next film.
2.Ra's al Ghul comes back. If you notice in Begins, Nolan focuses in on Liam Neeson closing his eyes for about a good 3 seconds before the train crashes. Also, Nolan has mentioned several times that he wants a female villain in the 3rd one. I don't see Cat-Woman fitting, so maybe the storyline of Batman and Ra's' daughter Talia al Ghul will be introduced. I really believe Nolan wanted his female villain to be Harley Quinn but without the Joker, I don't see this as being possible.
-
The Dark Knight was a great movie. 4 stars out of 4, easy. I hate to lump it into a "comic book movie", but I'd say it's easily the best comic book movie ever. I loved Batman Begins, but The Dark Knight movie had so much more to it. And the reason for that was the villains had more to them than Begins did. While I love the characters Ra's al Ghul, Carmine Falcone, and Scarecrow, they didn't have as much detail and resonance that Ledger's Joker or Eckhart's Two-Face had during Dark Knight.
While the pace/storylines sometimes seemed too frenetic, overall it worked greatly. There were so many layers to this movie and the acting was top-notch. Ledger deserves an Oscar nod and this crap about him getting it because he died is nonsense. Ledger's Joker is the Joker. I think his performance trumped Nicholson's by a mile, and I thought Jack was a great Joker, by the way. So I see no possible way the Joker role can be reprised. So that leaves a few problems for a 3rd film. Nolan has said repeatedly that his vision will be a trilogy, but with Ledger's death & no Joker, and Two-Face's death(there's no way that his death is implied, Two-Face is dead, funeral and all) what can be done for a 3rd film? Making a 3rd one could be impossible because how can Nolan top Dark Knight? I see a couple scenarios.
1.Center the story around The Riddler. I've seen some rumors and even posts on this site that the accountant will become The Riddler, which I think is ridiculous and people are reading too much into that. The Riddler will be portrayed by a big-time actor. I think Daniel Day Lewis would be a superb Riddler and has the type of acting ability where he could easily put up a Ledger-type performance that would help with the absence of Joker. Maybe Riddler uses Reese's knowledge in his plots and schemes. That's the only way I see Reese being used in the next film.
2.Ra's al Ghul comes back. If you notice in Begins, Nolan focuses in on Liam Neeson closing his eyes for about a good 3 seconds before the train crashes. Also, Nolan has mentioned several times that he wants a female villain in the 3rd one. I don't see Cat-Woman fitting, so maybe the storyline of Batman and Ra's' daughter Talia al Ghul will be introduced. I really believe Nolan wanted his female villain to be Harley Quinn but without the Joker, I don't see this as being possible.
Welcome to Celtics Blog Ace.
Now that you've mentioned it, I think Harley Quinn might still work. More of a Joker copy-cat than sidekick. I would really like to see Harley Quinn and The Riddler as the villains... they both fit perfectly into these films continuity (not cheesey, no superpowers). The penguin could in theory work, something akin to Danny Devito in Batman Returns (misshapen, hating the world).
Now that I think of it, Hush might be a great villain for the next film. He was a late addition to the cannon but a great character.
Schupac ... those funny parts were funny. I'm not sure why you felt they weren't. He had several one-liners that were intended to be funny and a lot of his behavior is dark humor. I agree that he was excellent though.
And it seems that most of the negative feedback is about Christian Bale and his sorta ridiculous Batman voice.
Yeah I'm not sure if this is something I'm just good to pick up on, or more I was enthralled by Ledger's performance and I'm making it up. Many of the jokes people laughed at were legitimately funny, so I wouldn't blame anyone for interpreting it differently than I.
Of course, for some reason the midnight show I went to was flooded with highschoolers and they definitely did have a sort of "look at me" mentality going on, people rushing to be the first to laugh at jokes... which of course led to some not-so-quick individuals laughing at what wasn't jokes ;-)
edit: So, kinda funny I talk about "not-so-quick individuals" and then type in broken grammar. What WEREN'T jokes.
-
1.Center the story around The Riddler. I've seen some rumors and even posts on this site that the accountant will become The Riddler, which I think is ridiculous and people are reading too much into that. The Riddler will be portrayed by a big-time actor. I think Daniel Day Lewis would be a superb Riddler and has the type of acting ability where he could easily put up a Ledger-type performance that would help with the absence of Joker. Maybe Riddler uses Reese's knowledge in his plots and schemes. That's the only way I see Reese being used in the next film.
The accountant as the Riddler isnt based on fanboy speculation, but rather on quotes from some of the actors if I recall write.
and I realize I have yet to comment on the movie yet. Movie is absolutely spectacular and calling it a superhero movie seems like an insult, and Im kind of a comic nerd. The characters were so intricate, complex and delicate. Overall, this film just blew me away.
-
Considering how closely that Nolan has formed his story's characters around the late 1970's darker version of the story-line, I doubt that Mr. Reece is suddenly doing to transform from a dumpy accountant to a long legged, well dressed, bollar hat wearing Edward Nygma.
The Riddler will definitely be a big name Hollywood actor and not the near unknown actor who played Mr. Reece.
I like the Daniel Day Lewis suggestion if he channels some of the same psychotic energy he showed in Gangs of New York. Nolan, however, has seemed to go off in an unexpected direction with his casting at times. So an unexpected route wouldn't surprise me.
One way of that happening, I think,would be having Nygma possibly being a family member of the the African-American gangster Gambol and be black would be a cool contemporary twist with Jamie Foxx as the Riddler.
I also think DiCaprio and Baron Cohen could play the part as well as both have the range of character that portraying the Riddler would require.
-
Bravo to all of for the great summaries. I went to see it with my brother prior to him having to hop on a plane so my ability to sit and download has been somewhat muted.
In my mind, without a doubt the next villan will be a female, just from a plot standpoint they need a female counter part and now that Rachel is gone the logical choice is a female villian.
I have all along hoped that Liam Nielson would be brought back somehow and by having the Tailia character added to the mix accomplishes both the femme fatale and Nielson.
Definately need to see it at the Imax and to focus on the script more.
But wow, what a ride!!!
-
i just wanted the movie and i must say wow. i've seen every batman movie and i grew up on the animated series of batman on cartoon network. i've never see such a realistic, demonic joker. the new batman series really entices me because its more like reality, where a criminal isn't so easy to stop. the joker is really a joke in the animated series and in the previous movies.
the movie however is extremely long, with many plots and subplots. it can almost be made into 2 movies. its better than the 1 villain and done movies though.
i'm real excited bout the next movie. i doubt harvey is actually dead and i'm glad the scarecrow made an appearance too. i hope its not another 3 years before i get another one of these. i can watch these all day.
i really do agree about the riddler comments. but these series of batman has brought more unusual villians in such as ra so maybe a lesser known villian might be brought it. as we can tell, the villians aren't like bane who are just after money. the villians are more true to their evil, and are a lot more cerebral. riddler works...
killer croc could be a side villian... scarface? those might be some to add to the mix with the riddler. btw... when are we going to see robin? i personally don't want to see him. he kills the batman image.
-
I have been a long time Batman fan and what I can truly say about this movie is wow. It truly took all the bad taste away in my mouth for the previous 4 Batman films in my book. Burton's versions got the dark tone but was a little too cartoonish in my opinion. The next two after Batman Returns just took silliness to the next level. They were too silly that it was such a shame that they almost destroyed the whole franchise. Thank God for Christopher Nolan and his vision for the franchise.
As for the movie itself, I could really say that this has the potential to be the best comic book movie of all time and that's coming from a big Spiderman fan. The level of realism in this film is so fantastic that I could say that this is how the Batman and the Joker would be in real life if they really existed. Ledger's Joker just took craziness to a whole new level and his way off the rockers performance was a perfect match to Bale's fragile stance on being a hero or just another plain vigilante.
After seeing the movie, the whole thing kinda reminded me of the Long Halloween storyline from the Batman comics. It had the same core, Harvey Dent-Jim Gordon-Batman trio teaming up to clean up Gotham, but this was just tailor-made to fit into the Batman universe that Nolan started on Batman Begins. The Joker was a minor character in the Long Halloween but am glad it was not the case on The Dark Knight. The Long Halloween was one of the best Batman stories I've ever read and I highly recommend it to all Batman fans.
As for the third movie of this trilogy, I leave it all up to Nolan's hands as he proved very capable of pulling this one off for two films in a row now. There are a ton of possibilities for the next villian but I agree with the consensus that the Riddler could be the next. Talia al Ghul, Ra's daughter, could also fit in this scheme that Nolan created. Whoever turns up for the next film, I am very confident that Nolan and Bale would pull it off once again. With that said, I can't wait for the third act.
-
the best part about it is the closeness to the actual comic book story of batman.
(http://www.comixconnection.com/uploaded_images/joker-704285.jpg)
clayman would turn batman into spiderman iii... penguin just doesn't seem real enough.. i mean who is someone already living who is rich enough to make all those umbrella weapons? therefore riddler is the conclusion. ra seems iffy, thought in the tv series he never dies and always comes back but that would lead batman away from gotham.
(http://www.thedarkknight.matthewclose.co.uk/Batmanfoes.jpg)
-
I thought it was phenomenal. This was, far and away, my favorite "comic book movie" ever, and probably my favorite film so far this year.
Also, to respond to Nick's criticism, I thought Maggie Gyllenhaal's Rachel Dawes was about 100 times better than Katie Holmes. She's an average looking woman, sure, but what's wrong with that? Bruce Wayne the playboy has supermodels on his arm. Bruce Wayne the noble hero sees that beauty isn't only skin deep. I think Gyllenhaal is a much better love interest than Kim Basinger, or Nicole Kidman, or Katie Holmes. (Only Michelle Pfeiffer really lived up, and she wasn't really a love interest, so much.)
The *only* thing I didn't like was Batman doing his Clint Eastwood impersonation with the voice. It just sounded a little off. That's a very small nit pick, though.
-
I thought it was phenomenal. This was, far and away, my favorite "comic book movie" ever, and probably my favorite film so far this year.
Also, to respond to Nick's criticism, I thought Maggie Gyllenhaal's Rachel Dawes was about 100 times better than Katie Holmes. She's an average looking woman, sure, but what's wrong with that? Bruce Wayne the playboy has supermodels on his arm. Bruce Wayne the noble hero sees that beauty isn't only skin deep. I think Gyllenhaal is a much better love interest than Kim Basinger, or Nicole Kidman, or Katie Holmes. (Only Michelle Pfeiffer really lived up, and she wasn't really a love interest, so much.)
The *only* thing I didn't like was Batman doing his Clint Eastwood impersonation with the voice. It just sounded a little off. That's a very small nit pick, though.
haha i agree with the voice thing. i mean really, batman is only a man in a mask. its impossible in reality for someone to change their voice THAT much.
-
Considering how closely that Nolan has formed his story's characters around the late 1970's darker version of the story-line, I doubt that Mr. Reece is suddenly doing to transform from a dumpy accountant to a long legged, well dressed, bollar hat wearing Edward Nygma.
The Riddler will definitely be a big name Hollywood actor and not the near unknown actor who played Mr. Reece.
I like the Daniel Day Lewis suggestion if he channels some of the same psychotic energy he showed in Gangs of New York. Nolan, however, has seemed to go off in an unexpected direction with his casting at times. So an unexpected route wouldn't surprise me.
One way of that happening, I think,would be having Nygma possibly being a family member of the the African-American gangster Gambol and be black would be a cool contemporary twist with Jamie Foxx as the Riddler.
I also think DiCaprio and Baron Cohen could play the part as well as both have the range of character that portraying the Riddler would require.
I'm definitely in the camp who thinks Reese COULD be the Riddler. I've brought up several points about the character in this thread about him on Superherohype.com: http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=307252
A lot of the fanboys are "omg no way!" against it, but it seems plausible to me if they made the Riddler a realistic unseen threat to the city.
-
Personally I thought it was great and Ledger should at least get an oscar nomination. My nitpicks would be Bale doing that growl the whole time and just for the sake of it...where on earth does the Joker get all these goons to work for him!? I mean in the first 5 minutes of the movie he kills off everyone he hired. How does this guy have any street cred? Who's signing up to work with a guy when he's likely to burn up the money he was going to pay you and cut you up? Clearly education as well as crime is a serious issue in Gotham.
-
Personally I thought it was great and Ledger should at least get an oscar nomination. My nitpicks would be Bale doing that growl the whole time and just for the sake of it...where on earth does the Joker get all these goons to work for him!? I mean in the first 5 minutes of the movie he kills off everyone he hired. How does this guy have any street cred? Who's signing up to work with a guy when he's likely to burn up the money he was going to pay you and cut you up? Clearly education as well as crime is a serious issue in Gotham.
They addressed that, Byrdman. Those kind of people are desperate and will work for whoever they can make money from. But also in the first movie all the nutjobs who were in Arkham were released into the Narrows. Those kind of nutjob mental-patients who have been exposed to the fear toxin naturally gravitate to a character like The Joker. That's how they explained it in the movie.
And also... I'm sure he pays some of them. He used the money to finance his operation and burned what he didn't need at the end.
-
so the movie has set the box office one day record; 66.4 mill
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iUrp4FEo_7YQxrTpBze-Hk4ob7PAD92118180
-
Well this movie was very well done and was in my opinion the best movie of the last few years. Definitely took the mantle of best comic book movie. This movie got it right with how to handle two villians and build them up, something Spiderman III failed to do. While the Joker was creepy and it would be tough to recast him, I believe someone will portray him in the 3rd one. Possibly introducing Joker's sidekick Harley by busting him out of jail. You would have to think the third one would mean absolute anarchy considering how this movie ended. If they don't decide to go the Joker route which for as dark as this series has been there really isn't too many other routes, considering alot of the characters are pretty campy. The only real "R Rated" characters in the batman universe are Joker, Two Face, Ra's Al Ghul, and at times perhaps Catwoman. But I don't see Nolan going the Riddler Catwoman route. Joker would probably be the best bet with perhaps another villian cast beside him.
-
Well this movie was very well done and was in my opinion the best movie of the last few years. Definitely took the mantle of best comic book movie. This movie got it right with how to handle two villians and build them up, something Spiderman III failed to do. While the Joker was creepy and it would be tough to recast him, I believe someone will portray him in the 3rd one. Possibly introducing Joker's sidekick Harley by busting him out of jail. You would have to think the third one would mean absolute anarchy considering how this movie ended. If they don't decide to go the Joker route which for as dark as this series has been there really isn't too many other routes, considering alot of the characters are pretty campy. The only real "R Rated" characters in the batman universe are Joker, Two Face, Ra's Al Ghul, and at times perhaps Catwoman. But I don't see Nolan going the Riddler Catwoman route. Joker would probably be the best bet with perhaps another villian cast beside him.
i don't think they'll bring back the joker in respect of ledger's incredible portrayal. the only showing of the joker would probably be in the asylum.
-
Loved it, but I did have a couple of issues.
It dragged a bit with the 2 Face plot line. They could have cut him out after he killed the male cop and saved the rest for a future movie. I was just disappointed in the lack of screen time for what was truly a great comic book villain. He should have been saved for the third movie, which would help a lot with the villain angle. 2 Face and a new villain would have been great to carry the third movie (I do like the 2 Face/Riddler combination but that was done previously so it may be why 2 Face was killed off).
Tying into that was the pinning the 2 Face murders on Batman. Even if you keep that plot line, there was no reason at all to make Batman a murderer. The murders easily could have been pinned on the Joker's goons and Gordon could have just stated that Dent saved his family and was killed in the process while the bad guy with the clown mask got away. Dent remains a hero, Batman is not a murderer. I know pinning the murders on him kind of makes him the Dark Knight, but it wasn't necessary and irritated the crap out of me. One of the things that makes Batman such a great hero is that he is just. If you take that away you kind of take away from Batman.
-
Very, very good movie. Did it live up to the hype? I'm not sure. There is just so much of it. If you compared it to an NBA Finals the series would have to go 7 games with every game having at least 2 overtimes to live up to the hype.
Bale was good, Ledger was great. I've always loved Freeman and Caine and they did their job well in their parts.
I agree that Gyllenhaal was good in this role. I don't see Batman with some bimbo supermodel.
-
I saw this in an Imax theater yesterday and was blown away. Great story, great action and Ledger was amazing as the Joker.
-
Personally I thought it was great and Ledger should at least get an oscar nomination. My nitpicks would be Bale doing that growl the whole time and just for the sake of it...where on earth does the Joker get all these goons to work for him!? I mean in the first 5 minutes of the movie he kills off everyone he hired. How does this guy have any street cred? Who's signing up to work with a guy when he's likely to burn up the money he was going to pay you and cut you up? Clearly education as well as crime is a serious issue in Gotham.
I don't know how one can get word out if one is dead.
Genius of the Joker is to pretend to be a hired goon and plant the seed in other hired goons to kill eachother off then he kills whoever is left off taking all the loot in the end, which he doesn't even care for but uses it to get other goons to do more of his dirty work.
It's actually a pretty funny cycle.
-
It is ironic that the Joker has much disdain for people who plan things out, people who preach for order and stability.
The Joker plans out things himself for his own chaotic intentions.
Everything the Joker does is calculated. There is a specific method to his madness.
His illogicalness is almost logical....
-
as one who grew up buying $.25 comic books every Saturday with my brother and father, I am a huge fan of going to see all the "comic book" movies that come out (disclaimer, I am not one who knows the writers and artists, just one that enjoyed really good story lines).
Earlier this summer I went and saw Iron Man and thought it was a great take, good action, good characters, good build up, overall top notch for a "comic book" movie. I thought the approach they took with Iron Man was light years ahead of the others including Spiderman. I was extremely impressed; then I saw Batman this weekend.
This is what comes to my mind:
In 1991 the Chicago White Sox opened up the new Comiskey Park, the first new stadium in baseball since 1973 (Royals). Although it had it's critics, it was hailed for being a great new stadium. In 1992 Camden Yards opened up in Baltimore, revolutionizing ballparks and making the year old Comiskey obsolete.
Batman is Camden yards in 1992, nothing else comes close.
-
One way of that happening, I think,would be having Nygma possibly being a family member of the the African-American gangster Gambol and be black would be a cool contemporary twist with Jamie Foxx as the Riddler.
I also think DiCaprio and Baron Cohen could play the part as well as both have the range of character that portraying the Riddler would require.
My first reaction to Jamie Foxx was "oh no that would be terrible" but the more I think of it, he might be able to. DiCaprio I don't think could be sinister enough, same with Baron Cohen.
I thought of some more villains might work:
Clayface (Nolan would probably make him a make-up artist as opposed to a man
with a malleable face)
This one is a stretch but "Sewer King" who I think was only in the animated series. He lived in the sewers and trained kids to pick pockets and perform petty theft for him. That could be reworked much darker.
Someone else already said Scarface - that could work, but I'm hesitant. I think it would be hard to do without the ventriloquist thing being silly.
And I say again- Harley Quinn would be perfect (a joker reincarnation) and Hush could work.
Man... I Think I'm going to have to go see this one again.
WHY SO SERIOUS?
-
The Dark Knight was awesome. And like any comic book movie, it ain't gonna be perfect. This maybe my favorite comic hero movie of all time, knocking off Superman. I plan to see it again this weekend.
And for those who criticize it for not living up to the hype. That is your own fault for seeking out to many images, trailers, plot leaks, etc. Just enjoy these films as they come. Don't ruin it for yourself.
-
a third movie without joker/ledger would be a tragedy....
i'll have to rave about this movie fully later.... but the kid BURIED jack's performance... i didn't think it could be done.....
-
I don't plan to see it.
any particular reason why? just wondering.
I loved it, great movie in general. due to the lackluster showings of hollywood recently, might be one of my favroite movie of the last 4 or 5 years.
awesome preformance by ledger as the joker, i do agree they pulled a venom on dent though. what is up with that lately? its like directors go "huh, a villan the fans really like, doesn't deserve a whole movie, ill ax that dude quick"
like, i understand the whole moral compass thing and joker bringing down the white knight, but you could have had him disapear, and done another movie that incorparated that last scene. that was my only problem with the movie, in my mind it should ahve ended with a picture of joker in a stright jacket at arkham, and gordon telling batman that they couldn't find dent. then mabey like a guy walking away into the lower parts of gotham flipping a coin.
-
I don't plan to see it.
any particular reason why? just wondering.
I loved it, great movie in general. due to the lackluster showings of hollywood recently, might be one of my favroite movie of the last 4 or 5 years.
awesome preformance by ledger as the joker, i do agree they pulled a venom on dent though. what is up with that lately? its like directors go "huh, a villan the fans really like, doesn't deserve a whole movie, ill ax that dude quick"
like, i understand the whole moral compass thing and joker bringing down the white knight, but you could have had him disapear, and done another movie that incorparated that last scene. that was my only problem with the movie, in my mind it should ahve ended with a picture of joker in a stright jacket at arkham, and gordon telling batman that they couldn't find dent. then mabey like a guy walking away into the lower parts of gotham flipping a coin.
I couldn't disagree more... no offense, but that's a cheesy hollywood way of saying, "Hey! There's going to be sequel!"
I love the way it ended... this movie stands on it's own, with complete closure. With that said -- it's still totally open for a sequel, but that fact wasn't shoved in our faces. It can stand alone, or be part of something much bigger... that's why Christopher Nolan is a genius.
-
I don't plan to see it.
any particular reason why? just wondering.
I loved it, great movie in general. due to the lackluster showings of hollywood recently, might be one of my favroite movie of the last 4 or 5 years.
awesome preformance by ledger as the joker, i do agree they pulled a venom on dent though. what is up with that lately? its like directors go "huh, a villan the fans really like, doesn't deserve a whole movie, ill ax that dude quick"
like, i understand the whole moral compass thing and joker bringing down the white knight, but you could have had him disapear, and done another movie that incorparated that last scene. that was my only problem with the movie, in my mind it should ahve ended with a picture of joker in a stright jacket at arkham, and gordon telling batman that they couldn't find dent. then mabey like a guy walking away into the lower parts of gotham flipping a coin.
I couldn't disagree more... no offense, but that's a cheesy hollywood way of saying, "Hey! There's going to be sequel!"
I love the way it ended... this movie stands on it's own, with complete closure. With that said -- it's still totally open for a sequel, but that fact wasn't shoved in our faces. It can stand alone, or be part of something much bigger... that's why Christopher Nolan is a genius.
normally i'd agree, but since i doubt there not going to make a third one, what with already owing christan bale the money for it contractualy, there's no downside to admiting there's a sequal.
unless there going to completly restart nolan's whole role, which would make no sense, there will be a third one, and while they could do the even more cheesy "yea, uh...that guy the good guys thought was dead apperntly fooled the paramedics, he's good!" move to get dent back into it, its more likely that ledger's death will impact the third one for lack of villan.
I agree, with nolan saying he wanted a female villan in the third one in numerous interviews before the heath ledger tragedy, that he had his eye on harley quinn, and her quest to free the joker. now, that seems to be unavalable.
I supppose you could still use harley and pair her with ivy, that was actually a good team in the comics when joker was in prision, but it will be tough not to make that feel thelma and louiseish, espically when thats exactly what the comics did with it. not saying nolan can't change thier dynamic, but a big part of that paring was "crazy girls night out crime spree" dynamic.
-
I think a better way of introducing the next villianswould be to leave the ending of TDK just the way it was.
Obviously Ledger was supposed to make at the very least a cameo appearance in the sequel. If Nolan introduces Harley Quinn as the Joker's wife who early in the film visits the Joker at Arkham Asylum and vows revenge against the Bat-Man(BTW I love that they went back to the original naming of him as The Bat-Man. Small thing but I loved it).
As they introduce Edward Nygma elsewhere as a master larceny criminal, Harley uses the Riddler as bait to lure out the Bat-Man for revenge.
That's just one way of looking at it but the Harley Race/Riddler combo, I believe is the most believable for a sequel.
-
I think a better way of introducing the next villianswould be to leave the ending of TDK just the way it was.
Obviously Ledger was supposed to make at the very least a cameo appearance in the sequel. If Nolan introduces Harley Quinn as the Joker's wife who early in the film visits the Joker at Arkham Asylum and vows revenge against the Bat-Man(BTW I love that they went back to the original naming of him as The Bat-Man. Small thing but I loved it).
As they introduce Edward Nygma elsewhere as a master larceny criminal, Harley uses the Riddler as bait to lure out the Bat-Man for revenge.
That's just one way of looking at it but the Harley Race/Riddler combo, I believe is the most believable for a sequel.
could work, really just substiuting ivy for riddler.
personaly, just because i liked the darker version of her, i'd stick with the harley/ivy combo if they go that route.
-
normally i'd agree, but since i doubt there not going to make a third one, what with already owing christan bale the money for it contractualy, there's no downside to admiting there's a sequal.
unless there going to completly restart nolan's whole role, which would make no sense, there will be a third one, and while they could do the even more cheesy "yea, uh...that guy the good guys thought was dead apperntly fooled the paramedics, he's good!" move to get dent back into it, its more likely that ledger's death will impact the third one for lack of villan.
I agree, with nolan saying he wanted a female villan in the third one in numerous interviews before the heath ledger tragedy, that he had his eye on harley quinn, and her quest to free the joker. now, that seems to be unavalable.
I supppose you could still use harley and pair her with ivy, that was actually a good team in the comics when joker was in prision, but it will be tough not to make that feel thelma and louiseish, espically when thats exactly what the comics did with it. not saying nolan can't change thier dynamic, but a big part of that paring was "crazy girls night out crime spree" dynamic.
I haven't kept up with the comics since I was much younger, but I think Harley was an animated series character. Maybe the comics adopted her. Either way, I definitely can see a Harley kind of character, like a copycat Joker. For girl villains it has to be either her, Al Ghul or Catwoman. I think Poison Ivy doesn't really flow with the movies, and it would have to introduce both her and Harley in order to make them team up. Too much for one movie to cover.
For male villains I think the Mad Hatter would be awesome, or a not cheesy Riddler.
-
normally i'd agree, but since i doubt there not going to make a third one, what with already owing christan bale the money for it contractualy, there's no downside to admiting there's a sequal.
unless there going to completly restart nolan's whole role, which would make no sense, there will be a third one, and while they could do the even more cheesy "yea, uh...that guy the good guys thought was dead apperntly fooled the paramedics, he's good!" move to get dent back into it, its more likely that ledger's death will impact the third one for lack of villan.
I agree, with nolan saying he wanted a female villan in the third one in numerous interviews before the heath ledger tragedy, that he had his eye on harley quinn, and her quest to free the joker. now, that seems to be unavalable.
I supppose you could still use harley and pair her with ivy, that was actually a good team in the comics when joker was in prision, but it will be tough not to make that feel thelma and louiseish, espically when thats exactly what the comics did with it. not saying nolan can't change thier dynamic, but a big part of that paring was "crazy girls night out crime spree" dynamic.
I haven't kept up with the comics since I was much younger, but I think Harley was an animated series character. Maybe the comics adopted her. Either way, I definitely can see a Harley kind of character, like a copycat Joker. For girl villains it has to be either her, Al Ghul or Catwoman. I think Poison Ivy doesn't really flow with the movies, and it would have to introduce both her and Harley in order to make them team up. Too much for one movie to cover.
For male villains I think the Mad Hatter would be awesome, or a not cheesy Riddler.
she did start on the animated series as a throw away character, but due to her popularity, she's been added to the batman cannon, and been in alot of big storylines since her debut.
-
How would they portray Ivy?
I just can't see how she could fit into the new, more realistic version of batman.
Some kind of chemist maybe?
-
How would they portray Ivy?
I just can't see how she could fit into the new, more realistic version of batman.
Some kind of chemist maybe?
that would be my bet, she was a chemist before she became ivy. i think you could do her justice as a dark character that uses posions grown from her knowledge of plant types (she's good at this in the comic, she comes up with some new air/blood borne toxin all the time) and play up the seduction angle she uses instead of the whole "plants are people too!" angle she uses in the comics a bit to much.
-
I don't plan to see it.
any particular reason why? just wondering.
I loved it, great movie in general. due to the lackluster showings of hollywood recently, might be one of my favroite movie of the last 4 or 5 years.
awesome preformance by ledger as the joker, i do agree they pulled a venom on dent though. what is up with that lately? its like directors go "huh, a villan the fans really like, doesn't deserve a whole movie, ill ax that dude quick"
like, i understand the whole moral compass thing and joker bringing down the white knight, but you could have had him disapear, and done another movie that incorparated that last scene. that was my only problem with the movie, in my mind it should ahve ended with a picture of joker in a stright jacket at arkham, and gordon telling batman that they couldn't find dent. then mabey like a guy walking away into the lower parts of gotham flipping a coin.
I couldn't disagree more... no offense, but that's a cheesy hollywood way of saying, "Hey! There's going to be sequel!"
I love the way it ended... this movie stands on it's own, with complete closure. With that said -- it's still totally open for a sequel, but that fact wasn't shoved in our faces. It can stand alone, or be part of something much bigger... that's why Christopher Nolan is a genius.
normally i'd agree, but since i doubt there not going to make a third one, what with already owing christan bale the money for it contractualy, there's no downside to admiting there's a sequal.
unless there going to completly restart nolan's whole role, which would make no sense, there will be a third one, and while they could do the even more cheesy "yea, uh...that guy the good guys thought was dead apperntly fooled the paramedics, he's good!" move to get dent back into it, its more likely that ledger's death will impact the third one for lack of villan.
I agree, with nolan saying he wanted a female villan in the third one in numerous interviews before the heath ledger tragedy, that he had his eye on harley quinn, and her quest to free the joker. now, that seems to be unavalable.
I supppose you could still use harley and pair her with ivy, that was actually a good team in the comics when joker was in prision, but it will be tough not to make that feel thelma and louiseish, espically when thats exactly what the comics did with it. not saying nolan can't change thier dynamic, but a big part of that paring was "crazy girls night out crime spree" dynamic.
I can't see them doing Harley Quinn regardless of Ledger's death. It's cool that she went from being introduced in an animated series to the actual comics, but I just don't think she really matters much. She's like Robin... not happening.
I really can't see them do Catwoman either. It's been done to death.
They said they wanted to do characters that haven't been in movies before and wanted a female involved. I think Talia Al Ghul is the obvious direction. They keep saying they conceive the series as a trilogy (and hopefully they end it with a trilogy and not let this series go to crap like most franchises). Introducing Talia and eventually the "shocking" return of Ra's Al Ghul at the end would be a nice way to tie together the trilogy. I'd also introduce another character and plot line as well, though... and that could probably be a realistic portrayal of a "riddler" character who sends cryptic ransom notes and bizarre phone calls.
-
remember that there were 3 robins, one of which was KIA. that could be real enough to add in the movies.
-
remember that there were 3 robins, one of which was KIA. that could be real enough to add in the movies.
Nah... if they were ever going to use a robin it would HAVE to be Dick Grayson... and they already said that Robin does not fit in the world.
Also, I seriously doubt they are going to use some obscure characters in this interpretation of TDK.
The whole Talia/Ra's Al Ghul thing is extremely important in the comics, but hasn't really been explored much in the movies, tv shows or cartoons. This is partially why people dismiss it, but that dynamic between the three is pretty important to Batman. Ra's wants Bruce to be the heir to his criminal empire... Talia and Bruce fall in love (in one comic they even get married temporarily and have a son together... although Talia fakes a miscarriage)... And the Nolan series took the relationship with Ra's Al Ghul even further by basically making him the mentor/enemy to Batman and the one who inspired him to become the symbol and legend. It just makes too much sense to tie the trilogy together with a return of Ra's. I'd be perfectly happy with a Joker cameo, additional cameos from other characters (example: Penguin can be in it, but I'd just have him as a mob boss (no deformities)... basically taking the Falcone/Maroni role in the film) and perhaps another villain such as the Riddler...
But the 3 act story would make sense to wrap up with Al Ghul returning in some capacity. And they would NOT need a "lazarus pit" to explain his return. Last we saw him, he was closing his eyes jedi style as the train was about to explode... but he's a master ninja. I'm positive he found a way to get out of there. :)
-
remember that there were 3 robins, one of which was KIA. that could be real enough to add in the movies.
Nah... if they were ever going to use a robin it would HAVE to be Dick Grayson... and they already said that Robin does not fit in the world.
Also, I seriously doubt they are going to use some obscure characters in this interpretation of TDK.
The whole Talia/Ra's Al Ghul thing is extremely important in the comics, but hasn't really been explored much in the movies, tv shows or cartoons. This is partially why people dismiss it, but that dynamic between the three is pretty important to Batman. Ra's wants Bruce to be the heir to his criminal empire... Talia and Bruce fall in love (in one comic they even get married temporarily and have a son together... although Talia fakes a miscarriage)... And the Nolan series took the relationship with Ra's Al Ghul even further by basically making him the mentor/enemy to Batman and the one who inspired him to become the symbol and legend. It just makes too much sense to tie the trilogy together with a return of Ra's. I'd be perfectly happy with a Joker cameo, additional cameos from other characters (example: Penguin can be in it, but I'd just have him as a mob boss (no deformities)... basically taking the Falcone/Maroni role in the film) and perhaps another villain such as the Riddler...
But the 3 act story would make sense to wrap up with Al Ghul returning in some capacity. And they would NOT need a "lazarus pit" to explain his return. Last we saw him, he was closing his eyes jedi style as the train was about to explode... but he's a master ninja. I'm positive he found a way to get out of there. :)
You get a TP for referencing the 3 act arc.
I'm sold by all these posts. A Talia and Ra's combo would work. But I still really want to The Riddler portrayed in these films... his character would fit so perfectly. And not some throwaway "semi villain" like Scarecrow. I can easily see him working with Ra's and Talia, or being used by them.
-
This movie is making a ton of money...I can't see how there won't be a 3rd film, even if Nolan or Bale aren't in it.
(Someone will make another Batman movie...)
-
I loved this film, it was all I wanted it to be.
The best dissappearing pen trick of all-time.
Here are some of my thoughts and theories about a next movie;
While I thought Ledger was absolutley brilliant, I think it would be a shame to dismiss the Joker from this series when the character has soo much potential, especially with the possibilty of a Harley-Quinn relationship developing now he's in Arkham... it would be hard to replace him, but I think it needs to be considered.
I'd also like to see Poison Ivy make an appearance, but not in a traditional way. I think it would be a good idea to just have her as a powerful and manipulative love interest of bruce wayne, sort of like her portrayal in the long halloween comic series where she infects and clouds his judgement, however without her power to control plant life. Charlise Theron Please! ;D
It seemed to me like the ending of this movie really leads to the idea of an antagonist seeking batman's true identity, which definently gives the chance of the riddler surfacing, maybe just as a private detector like he has been portrayed lately in comics (So I've been told). Leo Dicaprio would be great as many of you have mentioned. Perhaps some darkhorse possibilities could be Edward Norton or bob Downey jr.
Whatever happens, I have great faith now in Nolan creating a great ending to a trilogy or whatever he might have in mind!
-
Saw the movie once, going to see it a second time on IMAX today! The movie is so good!
-
This was by far my favorite super hero movie. I'd actually give it a 5 out of 5 stars, and I am a very harsh movie critic, especially of "blockbusters". (I'm quite the snob, actually)
Firstly, because the writing for the joker was excellent and Heath Ledger pulled off the character as I never hoped. He was convincingly crazy. Not typical hollywood CUCKOO CUCKOO crazy, or I-hurt-people-because-I'm-evil crazy. He seemed like a legitimate psychopath. Heath Ledger managed to portray the Joker as when he was at his absolute best (ex: the killing joke). I was not a fan of Heath Ledger's but after seeing this movie I find myself actually a little saddened he can't act in the future. His Joker is possibly, in my opinion, the greatest portrayal of a psychopathic villain in a film (of course, temper this by the fact that I was the movie about 18 hours ago... let's see if it stands the test of time).
Probably my favorite aspect of his portrayal was how unfunny I thought he was. He was saying dialogue that was written humourous, but his inflections and facial expressions made it the opposite. I was a little peeved at people laughing at every single joke - not sure if I'm being an elitist but I got the feeling they were giving the cheap laugh to something that wasn't made to be funny. It was the complexity of the dialogue and performance that these were funny jokes, told in an unfunny manner. I think some people didn't get that. (EDIT - yeah, I do sound like an elitist).
Secondly, Christian Bale continued to impress showing Batman as he was written by Frank Miller, at his best - truly dark and brooding, but a hero.
The plot moved at a good clip, the action scenes were entertaining, and the small touches really made it work (come on... the diversion was a fire truck--- on fire! perfect joker!). The jokes were a bit too much, but they were honestly funny.
I would complain that at many times the dialogue was more than a little ham-handed with two-face pretty much narrating his downfall.
I can't wait to buy it on DVD and decide if this movie can crack my top 20 all timers... I'm optimistic.
As far as the sequel - it's very sad we can't see another Joker. As good as, for example, Johnny Depp is, he could not follow up this portrayal. They would be foolish to incorporate him.
I think the best option would be The Riddler, as characters like Mr. Freeze or Poison Ivy don't really fit into this realistic portrayal. The Riddler seems a natural choice. I hope it isn't catwoman I can't see her working in these versions... nor the penguin, really, not unless they completely changed his character. I remember Rad Al Ghul had a daughter in the comic books, that might work. And I wouldn't put it past anyone to bring Two-face back.
Side note - I kind of wish they hadn't made scare-crow into sort of a "b level" villain in these films. He has the capability to be an awesome villain.
Bane is a distinct possibility, but I never liked his character myself. I hope it is The Riddler (thought - per the rumor post, I don't think the accountant could be recast... these films draw far too big name stars for their main roles, and I have no idea who played the accountant).
WOW... long post... I really loved this film.
please start a post listing your all-time top 20.... :D
-
This was by far my favorite super hero movie. I'd actually give it a 5 out of 5 stars, and I am a very harsh movie critic, especially of "blockbusters". (I'm quite the snob, actually)
Firstly, because the writing for the joker was excellent and Heath Ledger pulled off the character as I never hoped. He was convincingly crazy. Not typical hollywood CUCKOO CUCKOO crazy, or I-hurt-people-because-I'm-evil crazy. He seemed like a legitimate psychopath. Heath Ledger managed to portray the Joker as when he was at his absolute best (ex: the killing joke). I was not a fan of Heath Ledger's but after seeing this movie I find myself actually a little saddened he can't act in the future. His Joker is possibly, in my opinion, the greatest portrayal of a psychopathic villain in a film (of course, temper this by the fact that I was the movie about 18 hours ago... let's see if it stands the test of time).
Probably my favorite aspect of his portrayal was how unfunny I thought he was. He was saying dialogue that was written humourous, but his inflections and facial expressions made it the opposite. I was a little peeved at people laughing at every single joke - not sure if I'm being an elitist but I got the feeling they were giving the cheap laugh to something that wasn't made to be funny. It was the complexity of the dialogue and performance that these were funny jokes, told in an unfunny manner. I think some people didn't get that. (EDIT - yeah, I do sound like an elitist).
Secondly, Christian Bale continued to impress showing Batman as he was written by Frank Miller, at his best - truly dark and brooding, but a hero.
The plot moved at a good clip, the action scenes were entertaining, and the small touches really made it work (come on... the diversion was a fire truck--- on fire! perfect joker!). The jokes were a bit too much, but they were honestly funny.
I would complain that at many times the dialogue was more than a little ham-handed with two-face pretty much narrating his downfall.
I can't wait to buy it on DVD and decide if this movie can crack my top 20 all timers... I'm optimistic.
As far as the sequel - it's very sad we can't see another Joker. As good as, for example, Johnny Depp is, he could not follow up this portrayal. They would be foolish to incorporate him.
I think the best option would be The Riddler, as characters like Mr. Freeze or Poison Ivy don't really fit into this realistic portrayal. The Riddler seems a natural choice. I hope it isn't catwoman I can't see her working in these versions... nor the penguin, really, not unless they completely changed his character. I remember Rad Al Ghul had a daughter in the comic books, that might work. And I wouldn't put it past anyone to bring Two-face back.
Side note - I kind of wish they hadn't made scare-crow into sort of a "b level" villain in these films. He has the capability to be an awesome villain.
Bane is a distinct possibility, but I never liked his character myself. I hope it is The Riddler (thought - per the rumor post, I don't think the accountant could be recast... these films draw far too big name stars for their main roles, and I have no idea who played the accountant).
WOW... long post... I really loved this film.
please start a post listing your all-time top 20.... :D
That post will take a long time to write...
I better wait until I'm at work ;D
-
Finally saw the movie last night... and I thought it was really really good (but did drag slightly in places). Definitely the best movie I have seen so far this year.
1. Ledger was amazing.
2. Bale is perfect for Batman. I have no problem with the voice. It has to be masked in some way, would you rather it be deep and gruff or high and whiny?
3. No problem with Maggie G.
4. Many of the fight scenes were too fast (although this did add to the comic book feel of it all).
5. Funniest one-liner by the Joker to Batman: "You.... complete me"
6. Can't wait to see it on IMAX; can't wait for the third installment (I suspect 2-face will be back; other than that I leave the speculation to others).
7. I bet there will be a director's cut at some point. There are probably other scenes with Ledger that people (including me) will want to see. There were also scenes that looked like they were cut because of violence: (1) Joker cutting the mouth of the gangster (who died just from the cut mouth??); (2) Lau on top of the pile of money that was burned -- presumably he burned to death?
-
saw it, loved it - best Batman yet
the pencil trick was awesome
-
I loved this film, it was all I wanted it to be.
The best dissappearing pen trick of all-time.
Here are some of my thoughts and theories about a next movie;
While I thought Ledger was absolutley brilliant, I think it would be a shame to dismiss the Joker from this series when the character has soo much potential, especially with the possibilty of a Harley-Quinn relationship developing now he's in Arkham... it would be hard to replace him, but I think it needs to be considered.
I'd also like to see Poison Ivy make an appearance, but not in a traditional way. I think it would be a good idea to just have her as a powerful and manipulative love interest of bruce wayne, sort of like her portrayal in the long halloween comic series where she infects and clouds his judgement, however without her power to control plant life. Charlise Theron Please! ;D
It seemed to me like the ending of this movie really leads to the idea of an antagonist seeking batman's true identity, which definently gives the chance of the riddler surfacing, maybe just as a private detector like he has been portrayed lately in comics (So I've been told). Leo Dicaprio would be great as many of you have mentioned. Perhaps some darkhorse possibilities could be Edward Norton or bob Downey jr.
Whatever happens, I have great faith now in Nolan creating a great ending to a trilogy or whatever he might have in mind!
(http://i34.tinypic.com/2qx2mnq.gif)
-
Remember Siskel and Ebert? Well one of the guys on the show that show became said he thought it was probably the best superhero film ever, and i completely agree. I'd like to see Ledger nominated for best actor and the film nominated best film.
It was not just the best, but the most meaningful. The art perfectly reflects our time with evil, intrigue, and torture playing major roles. kids shouldn't watch it.
Batman is fundamentally different from all other major superheroes in that he doesn't have super powers and the film showed us that. It also showed how real heroes are cops that can't hide their faces and don't have unlimited resources and who's families are even on the line.
I hope the next film is totally different. For example there is a subplot in the DC universe that Batman was the only superhero with kryptonite just in case Superman went rogue. I'd love to see that.
During the Depression when nobody had money for stuff like comics Superman and Batman were the only ones that survived. There's a reason and this film essentially shows us why.
-
just want to quickly give my thoughts on this film.
heath ledger deserves an oscar for this. his portrayal of the joker was one of the best performances in decades. he turned that joker into one of the worst villains ever. credit where it's due, he's oscar worthy in my book. r.i.p.
christian bale was also outstanding. i would pay to watch that guy act. and there's maybe one other actor around that age i'd say that about - edward norton - and a handful of older ones. the guy is the total package and is the best batman ever.
the only part i didn't like was the sonar spying system. i wanted the boats to blow up, but the reasons for them not blowing up were perfectly acceptable.
the film, gets 5 stars from me and a 9.5/10. it's a fair reflection on today's world in more ways than one, the society being good and society being bad part.
that's a summary of my thoughts.
one last thing, there should never be another joker. never. that will not be topped.
-
just want to quickly give my thoughts on this film.
heath ledger deserves an oscar for this. his portrayal of the joker was one of the best performances in decades. he turned that joker into one of the worst villains ever. credit where it's due, he's oscar worthy in my book. r.i.p.
christian bale was also outstanding. i would pay to watch that guy act. and there's maybe one other actor around that age i'd say that about - edward norton - and a handful of older ones. the guy is the total package and is the best batman ever.
the only part i didn't like was the sonar spying system. i wanted the boats to blow up, but the reasons for them not blowing up were perfectly acceptable.
the film, gets 5 stars from me and a 9.5/10. it's a fair reflection on today's world in more ways than one, the society being good and society being bad part.
that's a summary of my thoughts.
one last thing, there should never be another joker. never. that will not be topped.
There were some rumors floating around yesterday that they are looking to cast someone like Johnny Depp to play the Riddler, but I'm not so sure about that. The same kind of thing happened last year... a lot of names were thrown around and a lot of curve balls were tossed to the fanboys until eventually the Heath Ledger thing became official.
I agree for the most part that Heath should not be replaced. But... I also think if the intention was the create a trilogy and they already had plans in mind that involved a cameo of some sorts by the Joker, they probably need to recast the character. If we see the madman in Arkham in a straight jacket and his head bowed, I'm all for it. In a scenario like that, you could probably use some archived footage of unused takes to throw some cackles and laughs in.
But if you think back to like... the Green Goblin's little cameo in Spider-man 2, it wasn't really necessary, but it was still cool. If the writers didn't really need him as a crucial part of the plot... just forget about him and move on out of respect for Heath.
-
I agree for the most part that Heath should not be replaced. But... I also think if the intention was the create a trilogy and they already had plans in mind that involved a cameo of some sorts by the Joker, they probably need to recast the character. If we see the madman in Arkham in a straight jacket and his head bowed, I'm all for it. In a scenario like that, you could probably use some archived footage of unused takes to throw some cackles and laughs in.
But if you think back to like... the Green Goblin's little cameo in Spider-man 2, it wasn't really necessary, but it was still cool. If the writers didn't really need him as a crucial part of the plot... just forget about him and move on out of respect for Heath.
i think seeing the joker in a straight jacket would diminish any reputation he created for himself in the dark knight. i'd hate to see the joker look weak.
to tell you the truth, i don't see how they can top this film. the riddler would be my choice if they make a third (they will) but i hope they don't.
i don't see the film being topped and i don't see a villain coming close to the joker.
i would just absolutely hate to see another joker. if it's archived footage of heath ledger, fine. if it's a new joker i'd seriously consider boycotting it, depending on who it was.
-
i forgot to add. film of the year so far, and one of the best this decade. could easily find a home in my top 10 or even top 5 someday.
-
I have it as 97 of the top 100 of all time...
-
Finally got to see this tonight.
Excellent movie, but after all the praise I'd heard my expectations were ridiculously high. Ledger was indeed a great Joker. The nurse's outfit was fantastic.
I didn't get why Wayne's voice got so deep when he was Batman, but I could get over that...Part of his disguise perhaps?
The pencil trick was great.
Fun movie. Couldn't believe how young some of the kids in the audience were.
-
I have some questions...
Did the joker switch the addresses, if so why?
Who did Batman think he was going to save?
What was the theme/message of the entire movie?
-
I have some questions...
Did the joker switch the addresses, if so why?
Who did Batman think he was going to save?
What was the theme/message of the entire movie?
The theme was "a little white lie is ok if it's for the better of the whole"
-
I have some questions...
Did the joker switch the addresses, if so why?
Who did Batman think he was going to save?
What was the theme/message of the entire movie?
#1 - Yes... he switched the address. He did so... cuz he's the Joker. He told Batman he'd break his one rule and in the Joker's demented little mind, he made Batman kill Rachel
#2 - He thought he was going to save Rachel. As he runs out of the police station, Gordon shouts, "Who are you going for?!" and Batman responds "RACHEL!". The police force went to the 2nd location assuming they were saving Harvey. Batman arrives at the "Rachel" location only to find Harvey instead. This went over my head the first time I watched it. Like some previous posters, I thought he decided to save Harvey simply because Harvey was the more important character to the city. In reality, he tried to save Rachel, but the Joker switched the addresses.
#3 - Well there were several themes. I'll let someone else answer that. One of the main themes was about the role of a hero in society. Another was whether or not people had any good in them or if at the end of the day we're all the same deplorable creatures as The Joker.... if one bad day could turn us into that same character. But meh... someone else can explain the themes better than me.
-
I have some questions...
Did the joker switch the addresses, if so why?
Who did Batman think he was going to save?
What was the theme/message of the entire movie?
Ok. My problem is that the theme of "doing what's best for the greater good" contradicts what Batman did. Batman went to go save Rachel not Harvey. It all worked out for the Joker because he got Harvey to turn into Two Face as a result but the whole point of the movie was lost in the process.
Batman did NOT sacrifice for the greater good. And it made him look like a horrible super hero.
I think this flaw in the plot is overlooked because it confused people to the point where they felt that because it's a "great" movie that they shouldn't question it or that they didn't want to appear dumb for not getting it.
#1 - Yes... he switched the address. He did so... cuz he's the Joker. He told Batman he'd break his one rule and in the Joker's demented little mind, he made Batman kill Rachel
#2 - He thought he was going to save Rachel. As he runs out of the police station, Gordon shouts, "Who are you going for?!" and Batman responds "RACHEL!". The police force went to the 2nd location assuming they were saving Harvey. Batman arrives at the "Rachel" location only to find Harvey instead. This went over my head the first time I watched it. Like some previous posters, I thought he decided to save Harvey simply because Harvey was the more important character to the city. In reality, he tried to save Rachel, but the Joker switched the addresses.
#3 - Well there were several themes. I'll let someone else answer that. One of the main themes was about the role of a hero in society. Another was whether or not people had any good in them or if at the end of the day we're all the same deplorable creatures as The Joker.... if one bad day could turn us into that same character. But meh... someone else can explain the themes better than me.
-
Ok. My problem is that the theme of "doing what's best for the greater good" contradicts what Batman did. Batman went to go save Rachel not Harvey. It all worked out for the Joker because he got Harvey to turn into Two Face as a result but the whole point of the movie was lost in the process.
Batman did NOT sacrifice for the greater good. And it made him look like a horrible super hero.
I think this flaw in the plot is overlooked because it confused people to the point where they felt that because it's a "great" movie that they shouldn't question it or that they didn't want to appear dumb for not getting it.
I think a large part of the movie is that Batman *isn't* infallible, he's *not* a perfect superhero. Harvey Dent was "the perfect man"; Batman is a flawed guy. Noble and heroic, but flawed. He wasn't sure he was up to the task, and in fact, was ready to hang up his cape if that's what it took to get Rachel. His very human emotion of love won out of his selfless heroic side.
I don't think this was a plot hole, so much as an essential plot device to demonstrate that Batman isn't a heroic archetype, but rather, a "dark knight" (as opposed to the more perfect white knight).
-
Ok. My problem is that the theme of "doing what's best for the greater good" contradicts what Batman did. Batman went to go save Rachel not Harvey. It all worked out for the Joker because he got Harvey to turn into Two Face as a result but the whole point of the movie was lost in the process.
Batman did NOT sacrifice for the greater good. And it made him look like a horrible super hero.
I think this flaw in the plot is overlooked because it confused people to the point where they felt that because it's a "great" movie that they shouldn't question it or that they didn't want to appear dumb for not getting it.
I think a large part of the movie is that Batman *isn't* infallible, he's *not* a perfect superhero. Harvey Dent was "the perfect man"; Batman is a flawed guy. Noble and heroic, but flawed. He wasn't sure he was up to the task, and in fact, was ready to hang up his cape if that's what it took to get Rachel. His very human emotion of love won out of his selfless heroic side.
I don't think this was a plot hole, so much as an essential plot device to demonstrate that Batman isn't a heroic archetype, but rather, a "dark knight" (as opposed to the more perfect white knight).
i think your right but I think at least half of the audience either doesn't know what happened or thinks that batman knew he was going to save dent. Maybe it's not a plot hole but it's at least bad story telling.
-
Ok. My problem is that the theme of "doing what's best for the greater good" contradicts what Batman did. Batman went to go save Rachel not Harvey. It all worked out for the Joker because he got Harvey to turn into Two Face as a result but the whole point of the movie was lost in the process.
Batman did NOT sacrifice for the greater good. And it made him look like a horrible super hero.
I think this flaw in the plot is overlooked because it confused people to the point where they felt that because it's a "great" movie that they shouldn't question it or that they didn't want to appear dumb for not getting it.
I think a large part of the movie is that Batman *isn't* infallible, he's *not* a perfect superhero. Harvey Dent was "the perfect man"; Batman is a flawed guy. Noble and heroic, but flawed. He wasn't sure he was up to the task, and in fact, was ready to hang up his cape if that's what it took to get Rachel. His very human emotion of love won out of his selfless heroic side.
I don't think this was a plot hole, so much as an essential plot device to demonstrate that Batman isn't a heroic archetype, but rather, a "dark knight" (as opposed to the more perfect white knight).
thats also a huge part of his comic book character. he's always protrayed as the most "human" superhero with regards to failing.
and, honestly Steve, if half your audience didn't get that he went to save racheal (if i read what your saying right) then thats there issue, i didn't find it hard to understand from the "i'm going after racheal!" line he yells at gordon.
It reminds me of when i went to see V for vendetta and this group of 5 people were complaining how it had horrible editing because at the end dead people were dressed up as V's >:(. these people were dead serous, they thought they had discovered some grand mistake. If they don't get symbolism or can't follow the plot, thats their issue, not the movies :)
-
Ok. My problem is that the theme of "doing what's best for the greater good" contradicts what Batman did. Batman went to go save Rachel not Harvey. It all worked out for the Joker because he got Harvey to turn into Two Face as a result but the whole point of the movie was lost in the process.
Batman did NOT sacrifice for the greater good. And it made him look like a horrible super hero.
I think this flaw in the plot is overlooked because it confused people to the point where they felt that because it's a "great" movie that they shouldn't question it or that they didn't want to appear dumb for not getting it.
I think a large part of the movie is that Batman *isn't* infallible, he's *not* a perfect superhero. Harvey Dent was "the perfect man"; Batman is a flawed guy. Noble and heroic, but flawed. He wasn't sure he was up to the task, and in fact, was ready to hang up his cape if that's what it took to get Rachel. His very human emotion of love won out of his selfless heroic side.
I don't think this was a plot hole, so much as an essential plot device to demonstrate that Batman isn't a heroic archetype, but rather, a "dark knight" (as opposed to the more perfect white knight).
thats also a huge part of his comic book character. he's always protrayed as the most "human" superhero with regards to failing.
and, honestly Steve, if half your audience didn't get that he went to save racheal (if i read what your saying right) then thats there issue, i didn't find it hard to understand from the "i'm going after racheal!" line he yells at gordon.
It reminds me of when i went to see V for vendetta and this group of 5 people were complaining how it had horrible editing because at the end dead people were dressed up as V's >:(. these people were dead serous, they thought they had discovered some grand mistake. If they don't get symbolism or can't follow the plot, thats their issue, not the movies :)
People assumed that Batman would do the "greater good" thing because the movie was setting himself up to do that. Even though he said "i'm going after rachael" there was confusion when he showed up at the dent location.
I'm just saying that it's amazing that some people are saying this movie is great and they have the ending and point of the movie completely backwards.
If you're in to comic books then you knew that batman was the most human of all the superheros but most people are basing it off of previous batmans and other comic book movies.
My other problem is Maggie Gylenhal's character wasn't worth anybody saving.
-
I find it very interesting the title of the movie actually fits the NEXT movie better.
At the end you have Batman running...fleeing from cops (LOL! Like he really couldn't take them out without hurting them...riiight) and he didn't actually save anyone as both Harvey and Rachel end up dying.
Now you got Batman with a poor rep and the majority of Gotham now thinks he's really a vigilante more so than a superhero who got some innocent ppl killed.
-
hey fellas... I had a dream last night that another Batman was coming out. I saw the trailer and it was like... Batman breaking into some military installation... lots of explosions and stuff. And people were excited. They were like "Another Batman! It's like Batman meets Commando!" ... but I was watching the trailer and thinking, "good god what the heck... This aint right. They just came out with The Dark Knight like a month ago."
It was a rival "Batman" movie being directed by Robert Zemeckis. So some people were like "oh snap... Robert Zemeckis? That's kinda tight. He did Back to the Future and Forrest Gump", but the part they didn't mention was that it was being produced by Joel Schumacher... and it was practically a sequel to "Batman and Robin", but being described as "Rambo Batman".
To make matters worse... the guy they cast to play Batman was James Van Der Beek. What the...? James Van Der Beek? It seemed like a ploy to cash in on the success of "The Dark Knight' and it made me think they were going to screw over the entire franchise.
The rationalization for this dream and the entire premise apparently stemmed from my memory of James Bond. Back in 1983 apparently 2 rival James Bond movies came out due to some legal mishap. "OctoEdited. Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline.", starring Roger Moore and "Never Say Never Again" starring Sean Connery.
Although the dream may have also been influenced by hearing about the (now sidelined) "Justice League" project which would have had a brand new person play Batman despite the fact the Nolan/Bale trilogy is not yet completed.
Point is... I had a dream that a Batman movie was coming out in a month starring James Van Der Beek as a militant Batman. Thanks for your time.
(http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/54/039_36509~James-Vanderbeek-Posters.jpg)
"I'm Batman"
-
Ok. My problem is that the theme of "doing what's best for the greater good" contradicts what Batman did. Batman went to go save Rachel not Harvey. It all worked out for the Joker because he got Harvey to turn into Two Face as a result but the whole point of the movie was lost in the process.
Batman did NOT sacrifice for the greater good. And it made him look like a horrible super hero.
I think this flaw in the plot is overlooked because it confused people to the point where they felt that because it's a "great" movie that they shouldn't question it or that they didn't want to appear dumb for not getting it.
Another reason why Batman decided to save Rachel instead of Dent might be in the original line he was going to say when Gordon asked him which one he would save. At Borders Books they have The Dark Knight movie script for sale, and in it when Gordon asked Batman which one he was going to save Batman simply replied, "Dent knew the risks."
I think this is a very appropriate reaction from Batman and would have been a more informative response if kept in the movie (although it may have been seen as a bit harsh towards Dent). Batman, Gordon, and Dent had teamed up and planned together to take down the mob together as a team. They were to bear the responsibility and outcome from whatever happened. Rachel got drawn in because of her connection to Dent. So she was the innocent one.
And Batman also went against doing what's best for the greater good later in the movie. When the public was looking to gun down Mr. Reese because the Joker told them to, Batman actually followed him and saved him even though Mr. Reese was planning to tell everyone his secret identity (and it would have been an easy way out for the film makers in the next sequel by just killing off the guy who knew is identity instead of dealing with it). This was definitely not in Batman's best interest, but he looked out for the innocent person.
And I also think this all points to Batman being an "anti-hero" or "human" hero. He's not perfect and I think that is an appealing trait.
And in unrelated news it looks like Warner Bros. is going to reboot the Superman franchise. The WB pictures president told the Wall Street Journal:
"Superman Returns," which had disappointing box-office returns, didn't please executives. "'Superman' didn't quite work as a film in the way that we wanted it to," says Mr. Robinov. "It didn't position the character the way he needed to be positioned." "Had 'Superman' worked in 2006, we would have had a movie for Christmas of this year or 2009," he adds. "But now the plan is just to reintroduce Superman..."
Like the recent Batman sequel -- which has become the highest-grossing film of the year thus far -- Mr. Robinov wants his next pack of superhero movies to be bathed in the same brooding tone as "The Dark Knight." Creatively, he sees exploring the evil side to characters as the key to unlocking some of Warner Bros.' DC properties. "We're going to try to go dark to the extent that the characters allow it," he says. That goes for the company's Superman franchise as well.
I don't think I like the sound of a "dark" Superman movie. Not every character is dark like Batman. Hopefully it just means a mature movie.
-
All I've gotta say is you know it's a legit movie when they slip Morgan Freeman in as "wise old sidekick guy." ;D
Man, that guy's been in a lot of movies.
-
Ok. My problem is that the theme of "doing what's best for the greater good" contradicts what Batman did. Batman went to go save Rachel not Harvey. It all worked out for the Joker because he got Harvey to turn into Two Face as a result but the whole point of the movie was lost in the process.
Batman did NOT sacrifice for the greater good. And it made him look like a horrible super hero.
I think this flaw in the plot is overlooked because it confused people to the point where they felt that because it's a "great" movie that they shouldn't question it or that they didn't want to appear dumb for not getting it.
Another reason why Batman decided to save Rachel instead of Dent might be in the original line he was going to say when Gordon asked him which one he would save. At Borders Books they have The Dark Knight movie script for sale, and in it when Gordon asked Batman which one he was going to save Batman simply replied, "Dent knew the risks."
I think this is a very appropriate reaction from Batman and would have been a more informative response if kept in the movie (although it may have been seen as a bit harsh towards Dent). Batman, Gordon, and Dent had teamed up and planned together to take down the mob together as a team. They were to bear the responsibility and outcome from whatever happened. Rachel got drawn in because of her connection to Dent. So she was the innocent one.
And Batman also went against doing what's best for the greater good later in the movie. When the public was looking to gun down Mr. Reese because the Joker told them to, Batman actually followed him and saved him even though Mr. Reese was planning to tell everyone his secret identity (and it would have been an easy way out for the film makers in the next sequel by just killing off the guy who knew is identity instead of dealing with it). This was definitely not in Batman's best interest, but he looked out for the innocent person.
And I also think this all points to Batman being an "anti-hero" or "human" hero. He's not perfect and I think that is an appealing trait.
And in unrelated news it looks like Warner Bros. is going to reboot the Superman franchise. The WB pictures president told the Wall Street Journal:
"Superman Returns," which had disappointing box-office returns, didn't please executives. "'Superman' didn't quite work as a film in the way that we wanted it to," says Mr. Robinov. "It didn't position the character the way he needed to be positioned." "Had 'Superman' worked in 2006, we would have had a movie for Christmas of this year or 2009," he adds. "But now the plan is just to reintroduce Superman..."
Like the recent Batman sequel -- which has become the highest-grossing film of the year thus far -- Mr. Robinov wants his next pack of superhero movies to be bathed in the same brooding tone as "The Dark Knight." Creatively, he sees exploring the evil side to characters as the key to unlocking some of Warner Bros.' DC properties. "We're going to try to go dark to the extent that the characters allow it," he says. That goes for the company's Superman franchise as well.
I don't think I like the sound of a "dark" Superman movie. Not every character is dark like Batman. Hopefully it just means a mature movie.
The previous Superman movie was originally planned to be darker and they considered Nicolas Cage for the lead. Then, for some reason, they went with the boring rehash version.
-
Hey I remember the dark brooding Superman.....it was Superman 3 with Richard Pryor?
It wasn't nearly has good as Superman or Superman 2.
I would say Superman Returns was better than Superman 3.
Superman 3 was entertaining and not awful like Superman 4.
-
http://www.hecklerspray.com/batman-3-johnny-depp-definitely-the-riddler-but-probably-not/200815927.php
johnny depp as the riddler?