RiffTrax Forum

General Discussion => Movie Talk => Topic started by: Rufus T on July 29, 2007, 10:04:15 AM

Title: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Rufus T on July 29, 2007, 10:04:15 AM
The teaser trailer is online.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTZd3RfJLmc
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Douglin on July 29, 2007, 10:26:17 AM
EDIT:Hah.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on July 29, 2007, 11:27:32 AM
The teaser trailer is online.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTZd3RfJLmc

Nice.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Bob on July 29, 2007, 11:33:11 AM
The teaser trailer is online.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTZd3RfJLmc

You are a certified meanie.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: oorat on July 29, 2007, 11:53:53 AM
I gotta say, I've been a bit mixed on the look of the Joker, and I couldn't even began to image what Heath would do with the part.  But that voice, I like it.  It really works for me, though for some reason it makes me think of Michael Keaton in Beetleguese when he says "I'm a man of my word". 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rufus T on July 29, 2007, 12:31:12 PM
Didn't see the other topic for some reason. Sorry.  :'(
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Hebs on July 30, 2007, 07:57:14 AM
I couldn't be more excited about this movie!   :cheers: 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: torgosPizza on July 30, 2007, 09:50:31 AM
Same here. That teaser kicks ass, even though there's not much to it. I'm confident Ledger will do a fine job.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rufus T on July 30, 2007, 09:52:05 AM
Same here. That teaser kicks ass, even though there's not much to it. I'm confident Ledger will do a fine job.

 Indeed.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rufus T on July 30, 2007, 09:54:20 AM
 Oh shit! I just realized something. I posted the wrong link. That explains the previous posts. My humor is accidental in this case my fellow rifftrax lovers. Forgive me.  :speechless:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rude on July 30, 2007, 02:24:37 PM
...

From Geek Monthly:
What If Batman (1966) Were Done Straight?
Ever wondered what if Adam West didn’t ham it up in the campy 60s version of Batman…check out this screen test.

http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/MOVoxnlfxHw

-Rude
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: googergieger on July 30, 2007, 03:19:14 PM
are you saying how he played batman is what gay people act like?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Junkyard on July 30, 2007, 03:24:52 PM
...

From Geek Monthly:
What If Batman (1966) Were Done Straight?
Ever wondered what if Adam West didn’t ham it up in the campy 60s version of Batman…check out this screen test.

Interesting... but not as fun.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on July 30, 2007, 03:30:07 PM
...

From Geek Monthly:
What If Batman (1966) Were Done Straight?
Ever wondered what if Adam West didn’t ham it up in the campy 60s version of Batman…check out this screen test.

http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/MOVoxnlfxHw

-Rude

I've got to think Cesar Romero and Ertha Kitt would never have fit in to name but two.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rude on July 30, 2007, 03:41:50 PM
Quote from: Junkyard
Interesting... but not as fun.

Yeah, nowhere near as fun. I absolutely loved this show when i was a kid. Although, when i was young i had no idea that the actors were playing their characters so cornball. But i imagine that i would still enjoy it even today. I wonder who's idea it was to finally take the show in that direction anyway?

For all the fun of a campy Batman, I really like the new "dark" direction that Nolan has taken the character.

-Rude
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Hebs on July 31, 2007, 07:36:09 AM
Haha I wonder if Heath will put white make up over a 'stache like Romero did :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: gbeenie on July 31, 2007, 10:55:17 AM
Quote from: Junkyard
Interesting... but not as fun.

Yeah, nowhere near as fun. I absolutely loved this show when i was a kid. Although, when i was young i had no idea that the actors were playing their characters so cornball. But i imagine that i would still enjoy it even today. I wonder who's idea it was to finally take the show in that direction anyway?

For all the fun of a campy Batman, I really like the new "dark" direction that Nolan has taken the character.

-Rude

See, to me, that's why comics qualify as modern mythology: there are innumerable ways to interpret these characters, as well as types of stories that can be told with them.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on July 31, 2007, 11:04:06 AM
I wonder who's idea it was to finally take the show in that direction anyway?

According to Uncle Wiki it was William Dozier, take that for what it's worth.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Hebs on July 31, 2007, 11:10:32 AM
I wonder who's idea it was to finally take the show in that direction anyway?

According to Uncle Wiki it was William Dozier, take that for what it's worth.


All I can picture is Robert Blake in the Bruce Lee Story...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: gbeenie on July 31, 2007, 11:11:08 AM
As I understand it, a Fox executive was at a party at the Playboy mansion, where they ran old film of the 40's Batman movie serials, for their comedic value. Apparently, a light went on in someone's head, and that's what started the ball rolling.

My favorite thing about the 60's Batman show was the fact that Bruce Wayne was a hipster, while Batman was a square. If you go along with the modern idea that Batman is the real guy, while Bruce Wayne is an affectation, that makes it even more brilliant.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on July 31, 2007, 11:13:28 AM
But Fox wanted hip and cool but still slightly edgy which is what we're seeing in Rude's vid.

Dozier apparently didn't like that approach and ratcheted up the silly to 11.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Johnny Unusual on August 03, 2007, 03:20:23 AM
Wow, it's about the same except they're kinda dull.

I like how they just sort of walk to the Batcave, rather than run to the Bat-Poles.  To me that's like Kirk saying "Beam us up." then they walk back to the ship.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Principal_Skin-trade on August 05, 2007, 03:35:16 PM
Even though the old Batman show was really fun... it was also totally gay. But Batman and Robin i'm sure everyone agrees was ten-hundred-thousand times gayer. I'm looking forward to seeing the Dark knight, I'm looking forward to some intelligent, intriguing, awesome well-balanced comic book action dammit!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: ObscureGamer on August 05, 2007, 03:50:39 PM
http://jaypinkerton.cracked.com/batman/   

This article is a bit dated in that it was published shortly before Batman Begins came out, but it is the single best characterization of Batman's success and appeal that I have ever seen, ever.   Jay Pinkerton argues against both the dark, shadowy, uber-realistic/serious "noir" Batman of Tim Burton, and the campy, gay, happy-go-lucky wink-nudge bat-boobery of Adam West and Joel Schumacher.  He argues that Batman's success is due not to his
darkness/realism or his campy fun-ness, but rather due to the fact that he is competely out of his mind.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on August 15, 2007, 05:37:47 AM
Apparently (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/08/14/senator-patrick-leahy-d-gotham/) Patrick Leahy  will have a role in the new film. He also had a small cameo in Batman and Robin, lets hope that's not a bad sign.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Sharktopus on August 15, 2007, 06:26:58 AM
Yup, Pat Leahy's an unabashed comics enthusiast. He also had a brief voice role as himself in an episode of Batman: The Animated Series.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on August 15, 2007, 06:36:44 AM
Yup, Pat Leahy's an unabashed comics enthusiast. He also had a brief voice role as himself in an episode of Batman: The Animated Series.

Really? Which episode? I have to watch it now.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Sharktopus on August 15, 2007, 06:50:53 AM
Yup, Pat Leahy's an unabashed comics enthusiast. He also had a brief voice role as himself in an episode of Batman: The Animated Series.

Really? Which episode? I have to watch it now.

"Showdown" - the episode with Jonah Hex. Also featuring the vocal talents of future RiffTrax stars Malcolm McDowell and David Warner. Come to think of it, I don't think he played himself, since he's in the flashback sequence and all, but he was a politician.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on August 15, 2007, 06:53:33 AM
Duly noted,

He's also a relatively prolific (for a politician at least) writer of comments and forwards to trade paperbacks.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Pak-Man on October 11, 2007, 10:37:19 AM
I hope the new Batman in some way incorporates this (http://www.superdickery.com/seduction/3.html) storyline from the comics into the movie.

Ahh the meaning of an innocent word corrupted by time. :^)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on October 11, 2007, 10:41:30 AM
I'm trying to work out what it means in context. I know it means a mistake or something but even then it seems a really stupid basis for a story.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: the long undertow on October 11, 2007, 11:52:45 AM
We had a project in sixth grade where we had to design a robot and tell the class about it or some nonsense.  One particularly sheltered girl named her robot "Boner" and that was pretty much the end of class that day.  Jerk teacher got mad at a room full of sixth-graders for laughing, as if you can expect any other sort of reaction from kids over something like that.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on October 11, 2007, 11:53:37 AM
You know, I think I may have actually READ that comic when I was a kid? If memory serves, it had something to do with them trying to outdo each other in terms of blunders - like it was some kind of popularity contest or something, getting in the paper for making the biggest mistake during the execution of their duties / crimes. It was very bizarre.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rude on October 11, 2007, 11:54:50 AM
...

Oh man, that website is too much!
I must've spent nearly 20minutes laughing out loud at some of those pictures...

-Rude
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on October 11, 2007, 11:57:41 AM
Yeah the website is one of my favorites. Shame of the Superson will be the name of my second album.
(http://www.superdickery.com/images/other/97_4_0000392.jpg)
You know, I think I may have actually READ that comic when I was a kid? If memory serves, it had something to do with them trying to outdo each other in terms of blunders - like it was some kind of popularity contest or something, getting in the paper for making the biggest mistake during the execution of their duties / crimes. It was very bizarre.

Well it seems an easy with for the Dark knight , he just needs to send a school bus driven by a nun off a bridge, I doubt the Joker could top that one. They were really scraping the bottom of the barrel with that one weren't they?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on November 30, 2007, 06:57:41 AM
Well that's different...

Not sure yet, I'll have to reserve judgment for now too.  Thus far though the 90's animated series Joker looks like it'll remain my favorite incarnation
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Monkey_Boy on November 30, 2007, 07:05:55 AM
When I heard they wanted to make The Joker "scary looking", I can't tell you the lengths of my disappointment. :(  The Joker's personality is what makes him scary, not his appearance! What's scarier than someone who thinks it's funny when people die?! However, upon hearing what his voice is going to sound like in the teaser trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boIhrBtsj-Y)! , it got me thinkin' he just might be able to pull it off! I think it may be a matter of lighting when it comes to the make-up. I doubt they're going to show him in a completely lit room.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Monkey_Boy on November 30, 2007, 07:08:36 AM
Well that's different...

Not sure yet, I'll have to reserve judgment for now too.  Thus far though the 90's animated series Joker looks like it'll remain my favorite incarnation
Played by none other than Luke Skywalker, himself, Mark Hammill! ;D I couldn't believe he did that voice! :o He really did a fantastic job with that character.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on November 30, 2007, 07:11:04 AM
I think Ledger's Joker looks fantastic, I'll be surprised if he can't pull it off.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tyrant on November 30, 2007, 01:51:56 PM
Well that's different...

Not sure yet, I'll have to reserve judgment for now too.  Thus far though the 90's animated series Joker looks like it'll remain my favorite incarnation
Played by none other than Luke Skywalker, himself, Mark Hammill! ;D I couldn't believe he did that voice! :o He really did a fantastic job with that character.

I've never agreed more with anyone as I agree with both of you. The Animated Series Joker is, to date, my favorite version of all time. I may have mentioned this before, but I love the story Mark Hammill tells of practicing the Joker voice in his car on his way home. He said he got some very strange looks.

  I've got nothing but high hopes for this movie. I hope Ledger plays the Joker Miller style.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on November 30, 2007, 02:43:12 PM
Well that's different...

Not sure yet, I'll have to reserve judgment for now too.  Thus far though the 90's animated series Joker looks like it'll remain my favorite incarnation
Played by none other than Luke Skywalker, himself, Mark Hammill! ;D I couldn't believe he did that voice! :o He really did a fantastic job with that character.

I've never agreed more with anyone as I agree with both of you. The Animated Series Joker is, to date, my favorite version of all time. I may have mentioned this before, but I love the story Mark Hammill tells of practicing the Joker voice in his car on his way home. He said he got some very strange looks.

  I've got nothing but high hopes for this movie. I hope Ledger plays the Joker Miller style.

I love how Mark Hammill ends up in the oddest places voice wise, I didn't know he was Joker for several years after I started watching the show.  He's also just recently played Hanukkah Zombie in the new Futurama movie, and of all things he played Ricochet Rabbit in an episode of Harvey Birdman.  The man is brilliant.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rude on November 30, 2007, 02:52:24 PM
Quote from: RoninFox
I love how Mark Hammill ends up in the oddest places voice wise...

I know, that's weird isn't it... it's funny how he actually manages to go from Winnie The Pooh to Metalocalypse!

-Rude
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tyrant on November 30, 2007, 03:47:31 PM
Quote from: RoninFox
I love how Mark Hammill ends up in the oddest places voice wise...

I know, that's weird isn't it... it's funny how he actually manages to go from Winnie The Pooh to Metalocalypse!

-Rude

  It's also funny that he's made himself a far more solid voice acting career than an actual on camera acting career. I say this with 1) utmost respect for Mark Hammil because I think he's a great guy and 2) for the voice acting field. Those guys/gals don't get enough credit and/or respect.

  I guess when you get typecasted to death, the recording booth can be your salvation.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on November 30, 2007, 04:00:27 PM
Quote from: RoninFox
I love how Mark Hammill ends up in the oddest places voice wise...

I know, that's weird isn't it... it's funny how he actually manages to go from Winnie The Pooh to Metalocalypse!

-Rude

  It's also funny that he's made himself a far more solid voice acting career than an actual on camera acting career. I say this with 1) utmost respect for Mark Hammil because I think he's a great guy and 2) for the voice acting field. Those guys/gals don't get enough credit and/or respect.

  I guess when you get typecasted to death, the recording booth can be your salvation.

agreed and agreed, I've often dreamed of getting into voice acting myself.  Also Mark's another person I respect the hell out of because he doesn't take himself seriously, how many times has he openly mocked himself by voicing himself or Luke between Family Guy, Simpsons, Robot Chicken etc?

back on topic though, I really do have high hopes for this movie.  The only thing I'm really unsure of as far as the Joker is the look.  If the rest of Ledger's performance is on par with what was on the trailer he's going to be awesome.  Seriously, that trailer gave me chills.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: FordPrefect on November 30, 2007, 11:52:31 PM
Well, I'm still looking forward to this movie.

But I have to say, I really still believe that Batman: The Animated Series is the best incarnation of Batman I've ever seen. Ever.  Same with his villains.

I have to agree with you. The changes they made to Mr. Freeze really gave the character depth. I love Mark Hamill's Joker. I was just watching the PG-13 version of "Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker" again earlier this week. Great movie.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on December 01, 2007, 04:52:05 AM
Well, I'm still looking forward to this movie.

But I have to say, I really still believe that Batman: The Animated Series is the best incarnation of Batman I've ever seen. Ever.  Same with his villains.

I have to agree with you. The changes they made to Mr. Freeze really gave the character depth. I love Mark Hamill's Joker. I was just watching the PG-13 version of "Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker" again earlier this week. Great movie.

I never liked Mr. Freeze at all until the "Heart of Ice" episode.  Why couldn't the writers for that show have handled the Batman and Robin script?...and casting...and direction...and everything
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on December 01, 2007, 10:53:13 AM
Yeah, B:tAS was undoubtedly the best serious incarnation of Batman ever, bar none. That show had some of the best retellings of my favourite comics (including the Joker Fish, with yet another magnificent performance by Mark), as well as some really interesting new stories as well. I agree about Mr. Freeze, the show's treatment of him was superb.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: gbeenie on December 01, 2007, 05:52:43 PM
Well, I'm still looking forward to this movie.

But I have to say, I really still believe that Batman: The Animated Series is the best incarnation of Batman I've ever seen. Ever.  Same with his villains.

I have to agree with you. The changes they made to Mr. Freeze really gave the character depth. I love Mark Hamill's Joker. I was just watching the PG-13 version of "Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker" again earlier this week. Great movie.

I never liked Mr. Freeze at all until the "Heart of Ice" episode.  Why couldn't the writers for that show have handled the Batman and Robin script?...and casting...and direction...and everything

I've often said that if I were rich, I'd give Paul Dini and Bruce Timm an Xmas present: Joel Schumacher, tied to a chair, and a couple of Louisville Sluggers (remember how they made fun of him on that one B:TAS episode?).
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on December 01, 2007, 06:18:24 PM
Well, I'm still looking forward to this movie.

But I have to say, I really still believe that Batman: The Animated Series is the best incarnation of Batman I've ever seen. Ever.  Same with his villains.

I have to agree with you. The changes they made to Mr. Freeze really gave the character depth. I love Mark Hamill's Joker. I was just watching the PG-13 version of "Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker" again earlier this week. Great movie.

I never liked Mr. Freeze at all until the "Heart of Ice" episode.  Why couldn't the writers for that show have handled the Batman and Robin script?...and casting...and direction...and everything

I've often said that if I were rich, I'd give Paul Dini and Bruce Timm an Xmas present: Joel Schumacher, tied to a chair, and a couple of Louisville Sluggers (remember how they made fun of him on that one B:TAS episode?).

Don't remember that, can you jog my memory?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: gbeenie on December 01, 2007, 06:25:20 PM
"Legends of the Dark Knight," the episode where a couple of kids give their different impressions of what Batman is like. One story is in the style of 50s Dick Sprang Batman comics, and the other is done in the style of Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns.

In between the two stories, the kids encounter another kid, named Joel, dressing a mannequin for a store-window display (Joel Schumacher used to be a window-dresser); Joel enthuses about Batman's "rubber armor," and how his car can drive up walls. The other kids dismiss Joel's take as pure hogwash.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on December 01, 2007, 06:27:28 PM
Hey you're right.  That's awesome.   :D  I love that episode.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Doctor Who? on December 01, 2007, 06:43:16 PM
I only discovered BTAS three years ago(I got a boxset of it for my little brother's birthday)and now I have to say that it is one of my favorite shows of all time.

It's the only tv or movie version of batman to get all the characters right.

I was always impressed with the fact that they made Robin cool something that every person who has ever made a big movie version has failed to do.

Also Kevin Conroy IS Batman,and Mark Hamill IS the Joker.

Sure I like other movie versions but none of them are as perfect as BTAS.

Also you should check out Justice League it's great too.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on December 02, 2007, 06:11:18 AM
I was always impressed with the fact that they made Robin cool something that every person who has ever made a big movie version has failed to do.

That blew me away too.  Part of the secret there was they didn't overuse him.  They had him there when Batman needed a partner or when there was a good story to tell with him, but the didn't force him in when he didn't belong.  Batman still had his dark alone time.  I don't think they ever came out and said it blatantly, but I always figured that Dick was focussed on his schoolwork at Gotham U during the week and only fought crime on weekends.

Of course by the time they got to Tim Drake as Robin this dynamic (ignore the pun) changed.  Never liked Tim nearly as much though.  The last chunk of TAS when it became the "Batman Superman Adventures" had it's ups and downs for me and a lot of what they changed rubbed me the wrong way.

Also Kevin Conroy IS Batman,and Mark Hamill IS the Joker.

Yes he is, and yes he is (even when I am too)!  I picked up the 1989 Batman 2 disc set a couple months ago and got a huge kick out of one of the special features.  It's the storyboard of the deleted scene that would have introduced Robin in the midst of a Batman/Joker car chase, and for the DVD they had it voiced by Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill.  Great stuff.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on December 02, 2007, 03:25:17 PM
That last one of the Joker isn't good. But it is FABULOUS!

I give it three snaps up, in "Z" formation. *snap* *snap* *snap*
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Phantom of Krankor on December 02, 2007, 04:41:04 PM
Okay, I wasn't too enthused about the look of the Joker before, but those pictures are changing my mind. :)

And yes, I agree that the animated series is probably the best incarnation of batman. I also have a lot of fond memories watching that show when I was little.

BTW, does it irk anyone else when someone says "To me, the truely best interpritation of batman will always be the 60s TV show." Ugh, yes its a classic and funny as hell, but it is NO WAY the best interpritation of batman.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tyrant on December 02, 2007, 05:14:14 PM
Okay, I wasn't too enthused about the look of the Joker before, but those pictures are changing my mind. :)

And yes, I agree that the animated series is probably the best incarnation of batman. I also have a lot of fond memories watching that show when I was little.

BTW, does it irk anyone else when someone says "To me, the truely best interpritation of batman will always be the 60s TV show." Ugh, yes its a classic and funny as hell, but it is NO WAY the best interpritation of batman.

  If you like the Caped Crusader Batman, then yeah, the ,60s show is the best (and Lord have mercy, I'm picking it OVER the last few movies before Batman Begins). But if you're into the Dark Knight Batman, animated series lords over all.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Doctor Who? on December 02, 2007, 07:23:48 PM
I was always impressed with the fact that they made Robin cool something that every person who has ever made a big movie version has failed to do.

That blew me away too.  Part of the secret there was they didn't overuse him.  They had him there when Batman needed a partner or when there was a good story to tell with him, but the didn't force him in when he didn't belong.  Batman still had his dark alone time.  I don't think they ever came out and said it blatantly, but I always figured that Dick was focussed on his schoolwork at Gotham U during the week and only fought crime on weekends.

Of course by the time they got to Tim Drake as Robin this dynamic (ignore the pun) changed.  Never liked Tim nearly as much though.  The last chunk of TAS when it became the "Batman Superman Adventures" had it's ups and downs for me and a lot of what they changed rubbed me the wrong way.

Also Kevin Conroy IS Batman,and Mark Hamill IS the Joker.

Yes he is, and yes he is (even when I am too)!  I picked up the 1989 Batman 2 disc set a couple months ago and got a huge kick out of one of the special features.  It's the storyboard of the deleted scene that would have introduced Robin in the midst of a Batman/Joker car chase, and for the DVD they had it voiced by Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill.  Great stuff.

Yeah I nearly jumped out of my seat when I found that on my Batman disc.

It was great.

Also I love Harly Quinn(I am not sure I spelled that right,sorry but I am too tired to look it up)Any episode with her is a real treat.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on December 02, 2007, 07:27:46 PM
"Legends of the Dark Knight," the episode where a couple of kids give their different impressions of what Batman is like. One story is in the style of 50s Dick Sprang Batman comics, and the other is done in the style of Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns.

In between the two stories, the kids encounter another kid, named Joel, dressing a mannequin for a store-window display (Joel Schumacher used to be a window-dresser); Joel enthuses about Batman's "rubber armor," and how his car can drive up walls. The other kids dismiss Joel's take as pure hogwash.

Like this
[yt=425,350]X6SM7KXKulQ[/yt]
and this
[yt=425,350]-QrBvWdlRDc[/yt]

I love how the girl looks like Miller's Robin (prior to the Miller version I mean)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: gbeenie on December 02, 2007, 07:55:03 PM
picked up the 1989 Batman 2 disc set a couple months ago and got a huge kick out of one of the special features.  It's the storyboard of the deleted scene that would have introduced Robin in the midst of a Batman/Joker car chase, and for the DVD they had it voiced by Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill.  Great stuff.

Oh crap! I never looked at my 2-disc Batman after I bought it; time to give that a look-see...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: gbeenie on December 02, 2007, 08:02:57 PM
Thanks for posting that, Tripe. Bloody brilliant. I LOVE Michael McKean's Joker.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on December 02, 2007, 08:56:48 PM
Hmm, I wonder if I could dig that up on YouTube. I'd love to see it, but I neither own nor know anyone who owns that DVD (who lives within 100 miles of me).
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on December 03, 2007, 05:00:28 AM
Thanks for posting that, Tripe. Bloody brilliant. I LOVE Michael McKean's Joker.

McKean completely nailed the 50's style, that whole episode was greatness personified.

Also I love Harly Quinn(I am not sure I spelled that right,sorry but I am too tired to look it up)Any episode with her is a real treat.

Close enough, you were just missing an E in Harley.  Of course I love Harley, she has to be the most sympathetic villain I can think of.  You really end up rooting for her, no matter what she's doing.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: mrbasehart on December 03, 2007, 06:05:59 AM
Thanks for posting that, Tripe. Bloody brilliant. I LOVE Michael McKean's Joker.

McKean completely nailed the 50's style, that whole episode was greatness personified.

Also I love Harly Quinn(I am not sure I spelled that right,sorry but I am too tired to look it up)Any episode with her is a real treat.

Close enough, you were just missing an E in Harley.  Of course I love Harley, she has to be the most sympathetic villain I can think of.  You really end up rooting for her, no matter what she's doing.

Kristen Bell said she'd kill to play her in a movie.  I think she'd be perfect.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Doctor Who? on December 03, 2007, 09:44:46 AM
You know what as i JAG fan I never thought of her in that role but now that you bring it up i think she would be great.

Anyone from Warner Brother's reading this?!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on December 03, 2007, 01:16:27 PM
Had to remind myself who that was, but I think you're right.  I say make it happen!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: mrbasehart on December 04, 2007, 10:44:12 AM
You know what as i JAG fan I never thought of her in that role but now that you bring it up i think she would be great.

Anyone from Warner Brother's reading this?!

I think that's Catherine Bell.  She's more Wonder Woman.  :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on December 04, 2007, 10:47:39 AM
Kristen Bell's the girl who looks a bit like Avril Livgne from the show Veronica something or other right?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: mrbasehart on December 04, 2007, 10:48:54 AM
Kriten Bell's the girl who looks a bit like Avril Livgne from the show Veronica something or other right?

Yeah, she's also in Heroes at the moment.  And I think Avril Lavigne has styled herself to look more like Kristen Bell, the resemblance is uncanny now. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: mrbasehart on December 11, 2007, 02:32:49 PM
I saw this over on BeyondHollywood.com:

(http://www.beyondhollywood.com/stillsx/2007/12/batman-dark-knight-ipod.jpg)

Those are some chunky lookin' wheels...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on December 12, 2007, 12:04:36 AM
I'll say this, if anyone ever puts Harley Quinn in a movie she'd better look as good as the model from gothampublicworks.com

(http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c189/RoninFox/harley6.jpg)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Crazy_88s on December 12, 2007, 01:07:54 AM
I'll say this, if anyone ever puts Harley Quinn in a movie she'd better look as good as the model from gothampublicworks.com
(http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c189/RoninFox/harley6.jpg)
I'd be scared to see Harley Quinn in a live action Batman film. Reminds me too much of the colorful and cheesy Batman and Robin and Batman Forever.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Hebs on December 12, 2007, 05:40:13 AM
I LOVE Michael McKean's Joker.

 - and Dave McKean's Joker, too!  Right, right?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: gbeenie on December 14, 2007, 12:57:55 AM
I LOVE Michael McKean's Joker.

 - and Dave McKean's Joker, too!  Right, right?


Yes, yes, of course.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: James of LinHood on December 14, 2007, 04:30:35 AM
The new Dark Knight trailer that's showing with I am Legend is on YouTube:

[yt=425,350]ylGUNzoz8cE[/yt]

Very awesome.  I can't wait to see this.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on December 14, 2007, 06:34:32 AM
The new Dark Knight trailer

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/cooleyre/oface.jpg)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BathTub on December 14, 2007, 10:45:22 AM
gone!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Shinigami on December 14, 2007, 11:49:30 AM
gone!

Here's one that's still up, camera work sucks though.

[yt=425,350]UjG2q5itxVM[/yt]

Joker + Shotgun = BFF
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: James of LinHood on December 14, 2007, 01:12:56 PM
Here's one that's still up

Thanks for finding a working version. 

According to Comingsoon.net, the official Quicktime version of this trailer is supposed to be released "early next week."  Until then, we'll have to put up with bootleg versions.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Wiseblood on December 14, 2007, 01:14:52 PM
Looks like we'll get the trailer on Sunday:

http://www.atasteforthetheatrical.com/
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Monkey_Boy on December 14, 2007, 02:31:36 PM
I'm disappointed that we didn't get a glimpse of Ledger's "Crazy Joker" face. That is what will make or break the movie for me. How did we not get a glimpse of him laughing wildly? You'd think that'd be the first thing they'd wanna show!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: James of LinHood on December 14, 2007, 07:04:41 PM
People keep reposting the trailer on YouTube as soon as they delete the old ones.  So, if you can't wait until Sunday to see the official high quality version, you can probably find it on there if you search.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: mrbasehart on December 14, 2007, 08:36:05 PM
Looks pretty good.  Here's one of the posters, which I will be "securing" for myself when they get delivered to us:

(http://www.beyondhollywood.com/stillsx/2007/12/darkknight-international-poster-joker.jpg)

And here's the Batman one:
(http://www.beyondhollywood.com/stillsx/2007/12/darkknight-international-poster.jpg)

Sorry Yanks, they're the international versions.  :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Shinigami on December 15, 2007, 12:09:17 AM
(http://photos.imageevent.com/batmanonfilm/thedarkknightimages/joker_onesheet2.jpg)

I WANT THIS POSTER!!!!!!!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: mrbasehart on December 15, 2007, 09:16:16 AM
Ooh.  That's a good one. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on December 16, 2007, 05:03:06 AM
do u mind if i write on ur shower door? no? kthxbye

jokercats.

As for the other posters, that looks even LESS like Gotham than Batman & Robin. Since when does Batman stand around INSIDE skyscrapers? wha wha wha... is he seeing his financial advisor? homina homina. I don't get it. Very Newyorky, not so Gothamy. And Joker looks really scary. Gosh, I bet he plays a lot of poker and... stabs people?

And what about the international title of this movie? What do you think it will change to? Because I'm pretty sure it doesn't translate. In Japan, it would probably be "Black Samurai" or something. A lot of people are going to be confused. "African Policeman? Huh?" Do they already have Batman nicknames in foreign countries?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on December 16, 2007, 01:07:51 PM
Since when does Batman stand around INSIDE skyscrapers? wha wha wha... is he seeing his financial advisor? homina homina.

 ;D :clap:

Does Batman stand in any building for no apparent reason during Batman & Robin? If so, you should include that in your riff script for Batman & Robin. ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: mrbasehart on December 16, 2007, 05:24:09 PM
Since when does Batman stand around INSIDE skyscrapers? wha wha wha... is he seeing his financial advisor? homina homina.

 ;D :clap:

Does Batman stand in any building for no apparent reason during Batman & Robin? If so, you should include that in your riff script for Batman & Robin. ;)

He does live in a cave.  Perhaps he just appreciates above ground living?  :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Wiseblood on December 16, 2007, 05:59:17 PM
High quality trailer!

http://www.atasteforthetheatrical.com/deathtrap/default.htm
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GregMcduck on December 16, 2007, 09:41:09 PM
The trailer confirms that even if it's the best comic book movie ever made I will still be able to laugh about Christian Bale's angry Batman voice.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on December 19, 2007, 03:31:42 AM
Heath Ledger has crushed my childhood dreams of becoming a psychotic clown.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BathTub on December 19, 2007, 04:55:35 AM
There can be only one?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Hebs on December 19, 2007, 09:43:22 AM
Soo excited for this movie - even if there is a Rachael Dawes.... 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: gbeenie on December 19, 2007, 11:59:58 AM
Soo excited for this movie - even if there is a Rachael Dawes.... 

At least they've traded up on the Rachael Daweses...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on December 19, 2007, 12:19:53 PM
Yep, from a Trabant to a Yugo  ;D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Hebs on December 19, 2007, 12:32:33 PM
Yep, from a Trabant to a Yugo  ;D

Bahaha - nicely put.   :clap:

(http://web.ard.de/galerie/bilderpool/boulevard/2007/bean/beanserie.jpg)

I think Bean would make a lovely Batman romantic interest...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on December 19, 2007, 12:34:56 PM
You girls and your slash fiction ::)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Hebs on December 19, 2007, 12:38:31 PM
You girls and your slash fiction ::)

Not to condescend, but even the inference makes me wince.  >.<
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on December 19, 2007, 12:40:33 PM
Hey you were the one who mentioned the romantic interest ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on December 19, 2007, 10:14:29 PM
Is Gyllenhaal really below Scientologist on the creepitometer? I think not.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: eclipt1c on December 20, 2007, 09:53:58 AM
Shhhh...this is not the first five minutes of Dark Knight.

[yt=425,350]7_5yPFX_ldk[/yt]
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GregMcduck on December 20, 2007, 12:18:13 PM
You're right, it's not.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: eclipt1c on December 20, 2007, 02:02:29 PM
Dammit they took it down.

Anyways, it'll probably be the same case with the trailer, it should keep getting reposted.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on January 12, 2008, 04:18:21 AM
HI, I'm becoming obsessed with posting quotes... so here's another
Quote
Director Christopher Nolan claims that, while the Joker is the most high-profile new character featured in "The Dark Knight," the movie actually belongs to District Attorney Harvey Dent. [via IGN]

Speaking to Los Angeles Times, Nolan said, "Harvey Dent is a tragic figure, and his story is the backbone of this film." Dent, who is a handsom and politically ambitious district attorney ends up scarred and turns into Two-Face, who is believed to be the main villain in the third installment.

"The Joker, he sort of cuts through (The Dark Knight)," Nolan explained. "He's got no story arc, he's just a force of nature tearing through. Heath [Ledger] has given an amazing performance in the role, it's really extraordinary. It's a dark and complex story, and the villains are dark and complex as well."

The Times also confirms rumors that made the rounds online last year that Cillian Murphy will reprise his role from "Batman Begins" as The Scarecrow in "The Dark Knight."

Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on January 12, 2008, 12:45:01 PM
This won't be the first time Joker will be depicted as "a force of nature" so to speak, which is another thing that gives me hope about the movie.  One of the reasons Joker has endured as a character so long is that he's a perfect foil to Batman, the complete chaos next to Batman, who strives to create order in his life.

Yeah, I'm one of those geeks that read too much into things.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on January 12, 2008, 12:51:19 PM
This won't be the first time Joker will be depicted as "a force of nature" so to speak, which is another thing that gives me hope about the movie.  One of the reasons Joker has endured as a character so long is that he's a perfect foil to Batman, the complete chaos next to Batman, who strives to create order in his life.

Yeah, I'm one of those geeks that read too much into things.

I'm leading discussion sections of classical myth this semester, and yesterday I used the Batman mythos as an example to show students how various theories of myth interpretation work.  It's fairly fruitful.

Awesome.  I still remember a friend of mine in my high school mythology class almost snapping in the middle of reading the Odyssey.  "Odysseus sucks!  He just kills or boinks everything he comes across, and when he gets back home, he doesn't even stay there, he just reclaims his throne and wife because he doesn't want someone else touching his stuff!  Give me Spiderman, damnit!"
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on January 12, 2008, 12:54:37 PM
Whether they intend it or not*, even when writing something as supposedly ephemeral as a comic book, the writers do tap into the archetypes because they have endured since humans first started telling stories.


*and in fact it's often better when it is unintentional.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on January 12, 2008, 09:34:28 PM
Good to know that they are not promoting the story of the film, but just the flashiest aspects. Hooray for Whoreywood.

Quote
He's got no story arc
Good. Good. I'm glad the marketing department is getting me all hyped up for a character with no story arc. That's a really great thing. Yes. There are no words joyous enough to describe it accurately.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Variety of Cells on January 12, 2008, 09:44:06 PM
One particular character not having a story arc is not a bad thing.  An Arcless character is not necessarily uninteresting or unimportant to the story.  Just as long as there are characters who do change throughout the film, having some that don't can serve as an interesting contrast. 

He's the joker.  Did you really expect him to have a change of heart by the end of the film?  Part of his appeal is his unyielding hate for batman, as I understand it.  Also, being his biggest and most popular enemy, I'm sure they are saving his arc for future films.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on January 12, 2008, 10:34:08 PM
Villains never have a character arc after they become the villain. They just get thrown in jail or killed. But it seems like kind of a waste. Am I really supposed to care about Harvey Dent? His name tells me he's a liar. I hate liars. Plus he's a politician anyway so... redundant. It's just that Nolan kind of admitted Joker is nothing but a big gimmick to sell tickets. Why should I see his movie after he admits it's falsely advertised? And why can't Bruce have the story arc? Why can't everybody have a story arc?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Variety of Cells on January 12, 2008, 11:15:37 PM
Because if everyone had a story arc the movie would be 4 hours long.  In movies, as in real life, not everyone changes at the same time.

He didn't admit Joker is a gimmick, he admitted that the Joker is not the main villain of the film, just as the Scarecrow was not the main villain of the first.  Does that mean that the scarecrow was a gimmick to sell tickets? 

You're still going to watch it.  If you liked the first one there's no way you won't see it some day.  Are you really going to fault the film for not being exactly like your preconceived notion of what the story should be that you built based on a few teaser trailers? 

EDIT:  Well now that I'm antagonizing you, you might not see it.  But if I didn't exist, I'm guessing you would.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Hebs on January 13, 2008, 07:26:20 AM
Whether they intend it or not*, even when writing something as supposedly ephemeral as a comic book, the writers do tap into the archetypes because they have endured since humans first started telling stories.


*and in fact it's often better when it is unintentional.

If you ever get the chance to hear Steve Ditko expound upon that, be prepared to be amazed AND horrified at his meandering, unceasing rhetoric.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on January 13, 2008, 08:00:13 AM
If you ever get the chance to hear Steve Ditko...
And he would be?

This Fella (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Ditko)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on January 22, 2008, 02:31:37 PM
Heath Ledger's dead!
http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/01/22/heath.ledger.dead/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/01/22/heath.ledger.dead/index.html)

Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Shinigami on January 23, 2008, 08:56:22 AM
I recently bought the "Why so serious" theatrical poster for $30 including shipping.  After word got out that Ledger died, prices have skyrocketed.  It's kind of sick.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: kodiakthejuggler on January 23, 2008, 09:10:13 AM
I recently bought the "Why so serious" theatrical poster for $30 including shipping.  After word got out that Ledger died, prices have skyrocketed.  It's kind of sick.

Reminds me of the scene at the beginning of Planes, Trains and Automobiles, when Steve Martin is trying to get a cab to the airport to make his flight right before Thanksgiving, but someone gets one ahead of him, so he offers to pay $50 for the cab, and the guy says "someone who'll pay $50 for a cab would surely pay $75", and Steve, being in a bind, agrees, saying "You're a thief!" to which the man replies: "Close, I'm a lawyer."

When people want something, they'll pay for it. When they really want something, they're willing to be exploited. The sad part is, there are those who exploit for their own gain. Bloody Pirates.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Hebs on January 23, 2008, 09:55:54 AM
When I find the source I'll post it, but I read that he was taking sleeping pills because the Joker character was giving him difficultly sleeping :(  Geesh... and apparently Christopher Nolan backed it up...  weird...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Courtney on January 23, 2008, 10:00:39 AM
I think it was a New York Times interview that he said that Hebs, I'll look for it too.  I believe he was on Ambien, which messes people up.  My mom works in sleep medicine and has had patients coming in completely screwed up because of it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Hebs on January 23, 2008, 10:08:27 AM
I think it was a New York Times interview that he said that Hebs, I'll look for it too.  I believe he was on Ambien, which messes people up.  My mom works in sleep medicine and has had patients coming in completely screwed up because of it.

Oh lordy, that's not good.

I took half - HALF and Ambien once at the behest of my old roommate who was taking it - and it put me out for many many more hours than I wanted to be asleep.  So I can't imagine what a whole one, or even more than one does to the body.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Bob on January 23, 2008, 10:11:11 AM
I think it was a New York Times interview that he said that Hebs, I'll look for it too.  I believe he was on Ambien, which messes people up.  My mom works in sleep medicine and has had patients coming in completely screwed up because of it.

I think this is the article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/movies/moviesspecial/04lyal.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/movies/moviesspecial/04lyal.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on January 23, 2008, 10:14:36 AM
And yet he spoke of taking two and it not having a satisfactory effect. That is some deep seated insomnia.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Courtney on January 23, 2008, 10:27:48 AM
And I believe it can cause respiratory problems sometimes, and if he had pneumonia then that could have certainly caused some problems.

/wannabe doctor talk
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Bob on January 23, 2008, 10:41:42 AM
I know when I am sick, I thinking nothing about taking too many nyquil capsuls, too many aspiran, too many, etc.    Kind of a wake up call for everyone.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on January 23, 2008, 10:44:24 AM
Yep and, pending the autopsy results, my generally theory would be that, an attempt to get the intended result of the Ambien which the prescribed dose wasn't providing. Although the rumors of substance abuse problems niggle somewhat.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: skenderberg on January 23, 2008, 10:51:19 AM
Even half an ambien would mess me up, but in my line of work I deal with people who pop half a dozen every day.  It depends on your weight and the amount of tolerance your body has built up.  It's not generally lethal by itself, but if you've already been taking something else, or even drinking too much alcohol, that's bad news.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Brak on January 23, 2008, 11:38:57 AM
Where's amandagal when you need her? Im sure she could tell us even more about taking this stuff. It really does suck that he died. with what you are saying with the up in price for those movie posters, im sure that The Dark Knight is going to be a huge success this year
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: anais.jude on January 23, 2008, 11:51:23 AM
i have never taken ambien, but i have had horrible insomnia, and it really effs you up. it got to the point where i would do ANYTHING to get to sleep. I hope that is was all an accident.
but i also hope the pharmecutical companies pay  :angry:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rude on January 23, 2008, 12:03:34 PM
...

(http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/5499/postimage0123jacknicholhf4.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)

Jack Nicholson asked to autograph Joker photo (http://thesuperficial.com/2008/01/jack_nicholson_asked_to_autogr.php)

Quote from: www.thesuperficial.com
Jack Nicholson walked out of the Wolseley Restaurant in London last night when paparazzi informed him of the death of Heath Ledger. They told him it was a drug overdose which prompted Jack to say “That’s awful. I warned him.” Then somebody shoved a Joker photo in his face for him to sign. Who could pull off such incredible levels of douche-ness? I mean besides Ashton Kutcher, Criss Angel (Were necklaces found at the scene?), Carson Daly, Adnan Ghalib, Andy Dick, my ex-girlfriend (She thought Clooney was a good Batman. How could we stay together after that?), Sam Lufti, Dick Cheney, Ryan Seacrest, the real Joker (I know you’re out there!), Billy Bush from Access Hollywood, Jimmy Fallon…. Anyone I’m leaving out?

What a douche...

-Rude
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on January 23, 2008, 12:04:44 PM
I think the look on Jack's face says it all.  I hope he tore that guy a new one.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Bob on January 23, 2008, 12:27:39 PM
I think the look on Jack's face says it all.  I hope he tore that guy a new one.

I don't think I would want Jack mad at me.    :speechless:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RVR II on January 23, 2008, 12:28:35 PM
I think the look on Jack's face says it all.  I hope he tore that guy a new one.

I don't think I would want Jack mad at me.    :speechless:
Really? And why not?
Something to hide?? :o
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on January 23, 2008, 12:29:58 PM
I'm Pretty sure you could outrun him. His entourage on the other hand...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Bob on January 23, 2008, 12:31:11 PM
I think the look on Jack's face says it all.  I hope he tore that guy a new one.

I don't think I would want Jack mad at me.    :speechless:
Really? And why not?
Something to hide?? :o

That is for me to know and you to never find out!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RVR II on January 23, 2008, 12:44:43 PM
I think the look on Jack's face says it all.  I hope he tore that guy a new one.

I don't think I would want Jack mad at me.    :speechless:
Really? And why not?
Something to hide?? :o

That is for me to know and you to never find out!
AH HA! Thought So... ::)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Quicksilver on January 23, 2008, 03:51:40 PM
i have never taken ambien, but i have had horrible insomnia, and it really effs you up. it got to the point where i would do ANYTHING to get to sleep. I hope that is was all an accident.
but i also hope the pharmecutical companies pay  :angry:

I take Ambien quite a bit, as someone once said about another substance, it's one hell of a drug. I wouldnt be surpirsed if this isnt directly ambien related. Basically, once you take ambien and if you dont fall asleep, you dont really know what you're doing, but you think you do. You're sleep walking conscious. So in this state of mind one could say drink a whole bottle of booze, do an 8 ball go drive a car, cook etc etc. I personally believe and yeah it's just a hunch, he OD'd on something else, but perhaps his judgment was impaired by ambien. I know someone close to me that once took 3 ambien, blacked out, woke up took the rest of the bottle(27pills) and blacked out again. The person in question didnt suffer and physical ill effects other than her room mate calling the police thinking she tried commiting suicide. Basically what I'm saying is it's pretty hard to OD from ambien.

I hate to admit it, but I can personally say I've taken 8 one night by mistake(I forgot, it kind of makes you forget) and still couldnt sleep, but I played halo apparently for 8 hours and cooked a philly cheese steak, the next day it took me about a good 16 hours to remember most of what happened. Now I hide my bottle from myself before I take one, it works rather well.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Shinigami on January 23, 2008, 04:41:31 PM
Where's amandagal when you need her? Im sure she could tell us even more about taking this stuff. It really does suck that he died. with what you are saying with the up in price for those movie posters, im sure that The Dark Knight is going to be a huge success this year

http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?from=R40&_trksid=m37&satitle=the+dark+knight%2C+poster&category0= (http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?from=R40&_trksid=m37&satitle=the+dark+knight%2C+poster&category0=)

Yeah, I got mine for $20 not including shipping, they're now going for $50 - $100.  Some people are even selling smaller home made prints for cheaper prices to confuse people.  It's ridiculous.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on January 23, 2008, 05:24:12 PM
Wow, if you can take an Ambien and then COOK... where the hell is this Washington ad campaign when you need it?

That Jack picture is priceless.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Quicksilver on January 23, 2008, 06:42:43 PM
Wow, if you can take an Ambien and then COOK... where the hell is this Washington ad campaign when you need it?

That Jack picture is priceless.

Oddly enough it's my most common side effect from the drug. A lot of people have the driving thing, I.........cook. For some reason it has to be some potentially dangerous activity. It's almost unfortunate the darn drug is so good at dealing with my insomnia, it's just rare events where something weird happens.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on January 23, 2008, 07:20:47 PM
I think this is how pork rinds were invented.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on March 01, 2008, 04:32:25 AM
for everyone pissy over the fact that most of the viral marketing is about the joker, when it has been discovered that the film is mainly about Harvey Dent.
Quote
We've heard that the marketing for "The Dark Knight" was going to get away from The Joker (Heath Ledger) and begin concentrating more on Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart). Apparently, the new campaign has just started.

By visiting IBelieveInHarveyDent.com, you will notice that the site has been updated. The big change is the addition of a form asking you to submit your email address and phone number. Once that's done, you are sent a message that states the following:

"Citizens of Gotham! The future of our city rests in your hands! Alone, we are helpless against the thugs and killers menacing our city. Together, we have the power to take back Gotham. In just a few days, you'll find out how."

It then asks you to verify your email address, following by the comment: "Keep an eye on http://www.ibelieveinharveydent.com and get ready to join a movement that will transform our city!"

That's all that's available right now and only time will tell what all of this leads to.

Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on March 01, 2008, 08:30:42 PM
*snore* Whoa. I'm sorry. Somebody must have dosed me with ARG viral marketing. Did anybody rape me while I was out? ::)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on March 02, 2008, 04:16:25 AM
I did.  (but you won't read this, so you'll never know)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: MSTJedi on March 04, 2008, 10:47:44 AM
Okay, back to Ambien . . . Why the hell is this stuff still available? Sure, it puts you to sleep, but I've heard a lot of stories about people doing weird crap while they're on it. The hosts of a local mid-day radio talk show here in the Dallas area have talked several times about the things they do (oh no, not things!) when they're on it. Does someone have to actually go out and have a wreck and kill someone or walk off a cliff while on it to get the FDA to wake the frak up? Apparently Ledger doesn't count since he only killed himself accidentally.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on March 04, 2008, 10:16:52 PM
But have you ever heard people talking about the weird things they do when they're NOT on Ambien? Of course not. They want to blame the drug. They don't tell you they were totally sober that time they ran naked through the science and nature museum. Or that they once ate a rat on a dare.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Quicksilver on March 05, 2008, 05:44:42 AM
I knew people would start talking about taking the drug off the market. It's time to start hoarding them, alcohol does some pretty weird things, but we dont talk about that. A little blue pill that makes hallucinate, drive while asleep, and for some.......cook late at night.,,,,,,,that's a story.  We dont hear about the weird things people do on viagra  :speechless:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: gbeenie on March 05, 2008, 09:22:39 AM
I knew people would start talking about taking the drug off the market. It's time to start hoarding them, alcohol does some pretty weird things, but we dont talk about that. A little blue pill that makes hallucinate, drive while asleep, and for some.......cook late at night.,,,,,,,that's a story.  We dont hear about the weird things people do on viagra  :speechless:

We don't? Isn't that what every two-bit hackneyed comedian does these days? It's the airline peanuts of the 2000s.

Nice analogy.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on March 07, 2008, 01:05:33 PM
Quote
Aaron Eckhart sat down with Wizard magazine to chat about his character in the upcoming "The Dark Knight" movie, revealing that we will get to see him become Two-Face.

"I think that right now we're showing who Harvey was before he was scarred, and it's an interesting role that he plays," said Eckhart. "We're looking at Gotham City trying to get out of its darkness." To clear things up, he added: "Harvey Dent turns into Harvey Two-Face in this movie."

There were rumors that the scars on Two-Face's face will not only be make-up, but CGI as well. Judging by Eckhart's comments, it seems that's exactly what we will get. "I won't tell you exactly what we're going for, but I think that I can say that it will use all of today's technology to create this character."

In addition, CHUD is reporting that director Christopher Nolan is experimenting with a creative way of depicting Two-Face, which will blend the sane and the insane sides of the character together.

The idea was to shoot the same scenes twice, one of Eckhart as Harvey Dent and the other as Two-Face. Then Nolan would take all the footage and combine it into one shot in post-production, where one side would be the nice Dent and the other would be the crazy Two-Face. And since Nolan has two takes of each scene, he has the luxury of presenting the character more one way or another. This will show Harvey as a constantly conflicted person.

sounds kinda cool
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: MSTJedi on March 07, 2008, 04:24:37 PM
I knew people would start talking about taking the drug off the market. It's time to start hoarding them, alcohol does some pretty weird things, but we dont talk about that. A little blue pill that makes hallucinate, drive while asleep, and for some.......cook late at night.,,,,,,,that's a story.  We dont hear about the weird things people do on viagra  :speechless:

My beef about Ambien is mostly about the unpredictability of the effect it has on someone. I wouldn't take Viagra for the same reason. With my luck, I'd be one of the guys who ends up with the 5-hour erection. With alcohol, you know what you're getting into. You can counteract the consequences by a certain amount of planning. You can't plan not to drive while you're asleep. It just happens. It's the same reason why I never tried LSD or 'shrooms even at my most experimental. You never know where a bad trip will take you.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on March 07, 2008, 04:26:27 PM
'shrooms are the only drug I would do again.  Not that I have done them.  Theoretically I mean.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on March 07, 2008, 04:28:51 PM
The only substance that has ever given me any sort of euphoric rush at all is Tobacco. I've tried a few other things but none of them ever really did anything for me.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on March 07, 2008, 08:21:35 PM
I tried weed once in college. All it did was make the muscles in my arms randomly twitch for about an hour.

I think I'll stick with caffeine.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Quicksilver on March 07, 2008, 10:02:42 PM
The real lesson is, people should know their own limits and not do substances that could harm them, everyone is different.

I smoked 3 minutes ago and feel great.......but that's just me. I've know a lot of people that cannot get high and others that really should not.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on March 08, 2008, 04:07:05 AM
Yeah, people. Know your limits. To find out your limits, try each and every drug and substance you can get your hands on. All at once if possible. ::)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on March 08, 2008, 04:11:52 AM
I have nothing to add on drugs,still trying to steer this thread back on topic, not that it matters.
Quote
About a week ago, Warner Bros kicked off a new viral campaign for "The Dark Knight," focusing more on Harvey Dent rather than The Joker. By visiting IBelieveInHarveyDent.com fans were able to submit their email address and telephone number and in return a message was emailed stating: "Together, we have the power to take back Gotham. In just a few days, you'll find out how."

Today, I noticed that someone has been trying to reach me all day on my cell phone, from number "000-000-0000." The next time I got the call, I picked up and heard a prerecording from Harvey Dent, explaining that he is ready to fight for Gotham and that he needs my help. One of the way to do so, is to visit IBelieveHarveyDent.com.

Since I want to be a good citizen of Gotham, I went to the site and saw that it has been updated yet again. This time it is set up as Dent's official campaign site, where he asks for your support. Some of the things you can do is to spell "Harvey Dent" in human letters, arrange a Dent parade and more. In addition, he will be hitting the road in a Dent mobile and possibly coming to a town near you.
alright ignore this and resume your drug talk
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on March 08, 2008, 04:15:43 AM
Dang, the one thing I didn't do when I signed up was give my phone number, that would have been great to get that phone call.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Quicksilver on March 09, 2008, 12:09:55 PM
Yeah, people. Know your limits. To find out your limits, try each and every drug and substance you can get your hands on. All at once if possible. ::)

Luckily some drugs dont have limits per say, you just shouldnt do them.......ever. When you take ambien you just need to follow these steps, hide your keys, turn off the gas, lock up the chain saw and cordless drill get in bed and then take the pill.

I disagree with the alcohol comment, I dont think I've ever really drank and known what was going to happen. At least when you pop an ambien, you know you should not under any circumstances do this this and this, but alcohol there are levels of intoxication, which can lead to anything happening. With ambien, you know you might do certain things, but you wont beat your wife, drive a car into a tree at 80mph(8mph with  ambien), start a knife fight wife some woman named earl and/or anything imaginable.

Really I just feel really bad for Mr. Ledger, I feel like I know what he was going through, with ridiculous work schedules, outside stresses and a cabinet full of pill bottles. Not that I ever had that many scripts at one time, but I've been scripted everything on this list at one time or another. Insomnia is a horrible thing to have and any requiring pain meds is equal or worse. All I think of is him having to lets say get everyday at .... work for 14 hours or so, and try to get to sleep for the next day and repeat this process for a few months.  I'll stop there, it's a shame

The movie however does look pretty cool.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: MSTJedi on March 09, 2008, 01:02:38 PM
I disagree with the alcohol comment, I dont think I've ever really drank and known what was going to happen. At least when you pop an ambien, you know you should not under any circumstances do this this and this, but alcohol there are levels of intoxication, which can lead to anything happening. With ambien, you know you might do certain things, but you wont beat your wife, drive a car into a tree at 80mph(8mph with  ambien), start a knife fight wife some woman named earl and/or anything imaginable.

Well, part of the "planning" I spoke of was planning to not get sh*t-faced drunk in the first place. There's developing a nice buzz and then there's peeing in the parking lot and puking behind the dumpster. It's all about keeping in control of the situation. I do realize that there are some people who are naturally disposed to not have any control and therefore should not drink at all. My issue with Ambien is that it seems that you have little control over what it'll make you do.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Quicksilver on March 09, 2008, 02:22:16 PM
hate to continue going off topic but it's an interesting topic. I honestly cannot comprehend how someone gets in their car and drives on the stuff. I feel as though there are a few random one in a million occurrences where someone really didn't know what they were doing and other times, when someone consciously made the decision and blamed the drug.

I mean the most involuntary thing it has made me do was cook. Here's the catch in all the cases I just wanted something to eat and then decided to get fancy and cook something. I did make the decision,  it is hard to tell how shit faced you are. Also, I felt it was safe to cook and being it's happened a couple times, nothing negative occurred due to this action.

I think it comes down to your ability to retain judgment under the influence and some people dont have it. Maybe these people who take ambien and drive are the same people that are likely to drive on alcohol. You know what I'm saying? This almost comes down to the sheer number of people taking ambien and the small percentage of those that dont know how powerful it is. People should just be informed by the doctor to really watch out for odd reactions. I can tell you I wasnt, but I research anything I put in my body.

I'll agree with you on a level, this drug should not be prescribed like candy to anyone that comes in saying they cannot sleep. It should be a last hope for someone with chronic insomnia, not just for random acute insomnia.

I've had insomnia since I was 13, had been taking tylenol PM for years, then that didnt work so the doctors put me on xanax and anti-depressants to sedate me, then different anti-depressants and klonopin, then sonata, then lunesta, finally arriving at ambien. I hate this, but the stuff works and gets me to my job and keeps my mood stable(since I can sleep). Basically I'll never be normal.

In all I dont really think ambien directly related to heath's death, it might have played a part, but I can tell you oxycontin and xanax were most likely the cause. They will kill you easily in the right mixture and with the other drugs combined.

Sorry got a bit rambly
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on March 10, 2008, 03:54:35 AM
My only concern about this situation now is that if Heath Ledger did in fact play the Joker well, then what's to be of the character in future installments of this incarnation of Batman?  Do they kill him off in this film?  And if not then who would replace Ledger?  We'll find out in a few months I suppose when the movie finally comes out.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on March 10, 2008, 03:56:28 AM
Jack Nicholson?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on March 10, 2008, 04:26:50 AM
Jack Nicholson?

HAHA!  :rimshot:  Seriously though, I loved Jack as the Joker the first time around but if Ledger is as good as people are saying then they'll be hard-pressed to replace him.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on March 10, 2008, 04:53:54 AM
CGI my friend, CGI.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on March 10, 2008, 05:00:30 AM
I don't think anyone informed has been able to say whether he's "as good as" anything. People on the internet (not informed) have been ass-uming he's brilliant based on the trailers and that's it. That, and hatred of Jack Nicholson. I'll be glad for the chance to see someone else try the role (after Heath) but my testicles will probably be around my ankles before then.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on March 10, 2008, 05:03:20 AM
I don't think anyone informed has been able to say whether he's "as good as" anything. People on the internet (not informed) have been ass-uming he's brilliant based on the trailers and that's it. That, and hatred of Jack Nicholson. I'll be glad for the chance to see someone else try the role (after Heath) but my testicles will probably be around my ankles before then.

No, I agree, at this point it is simply hype and speculation that he plays the role well.  It will also be interesting to know if they changed anything after his untimely demise.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Quicksilver on March 10, 2008, 10:43:42 AM
CGI my friend, CGI.

So exactly how they handled this situation in Plan9!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on March 10, 2008, 11:27:45 AM
CGI my friend, CGI.

So exactly how they handled this situation in Plan9!

That was a Cape Concealed Image.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Quicksilver on March 10, 2008, 11:56:16 AM
CGI my friend, CGI.

So exactly how they handled this situation in Plan9!

That was a Cape Concealed Image.
:clap:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on March 10, 2008, 09:23:54 PM
CGI my friend, CGI.

So exactly how they handled this situation in Plan9!

That was a Cape Concealed Image.
:clap:
That's CCI, for those of you who are Terrible At Processing Initials Or Conceiving Acronyms.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on March 13, 2008, 10:03:44 AM
Shit's getting out of hand already.  There were some "critics" saying that Ledger's performance is "Oscar worthy",..I'm sure he does a good job but lets not jump the gun just yet.  Have these "critics" seen the entire movie yet?  I highly doubt it.  I have no idea who these "critics" are, as they were not named but lets just save our analysis of Ledger's Joker until the film's release.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on March 13, 2008, 07:09:34 PM
CGI my friend, CGI.

So exactly how they handled this situation in Plan9!

That was a Cape Concealed Image.
:clap:
That's CCI, for those of you who are Terrible At Processing Initials Or Conceiving Acronyms.

In other words if you are suffering from TAPIOCA syndrome.

Mmmm, tapioca...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rude on March 14, 2008, 03:24:17 PM
...

(http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/1710/dentfs7.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)

So... Do you believe in Harvey Dent? (http://ibelieveinharveydent.com/)

Apparently the marketing machine behind The Dark Knight thinks that promoting an obscure character from a movie that hasn't even been released yet is a great idea. I'm sure it totally helps that the workers aren't allowed to break character and even mention the fact that they're actually promoting a Batman movie. But, if you're a geek like me and the "Dentmobile" is in your area... you might actually want to swing by and pick up some free swag.

Otherwise, iwatchstuff.com has a nice little recap of how this "event" went down in New York: Exclusive: I Believed in Harvey Dent! (http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2008/03/exclusive_i_believed_in_harvey.php)

-Rude
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on March 14, 2008, 09:09:39 PM
Personally, I think Harvey Dent is a fictional character, but I don't discourage other people in believing in him.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on March 15, 2008, 02:28:27 AM
Apparently the marketing machine behind The Dark Knight thinks that promoting an obscure character from a movie that hasn't even been released yet is a great idea.

Many words come to mind when thinking of the character of Harvey Dent.

If you're a fan of Batman in any real capacity, "obscure" doesn't qualify as one of them.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on March 15, 2008, 06:36:46 AM
If you're a Batman fan, they don't have to market it to you. (Suckers!)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on March 15, 2008, 06:40:38 AM
That's a fair point, Dent's been around for ages but the general public's knowledge of Batman is still mostly derived from the Adam West series and Dent never turned up in that.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on March 15, 2008, 06:46:33 AM
If you're a Batman fan, they don't have to market it to you. (Suckers!)

But the marketing will be more effective on you.

That's a fair point, Dent's been around for ages but the general public's knowledge of Batman is still mostly derived from the Adam West series and Dent never turned up in that.

I think he's had enough exposure though the comics, the animated series, and Batman Forever for anyone paying attention to at least have an inkling of him.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on March 15, 2008, 06:50:18 AM
That's a fair point, Dent's been around for ages but the general public's knowledge of Batman is still mostly derived from the Adam West series and Dent never turned up in that.

I think he's had enough exposure though the comics, the animated series, and Batman Forever for anyone paying attention to at least have an inkling of him.

But that's the thing though, I like most of that, you like most of that, but you're average movie goer still think

"pow" "sock" "blamm-oo"

and the Batusi.

I think Rude's description was a pretty good one as far as the general public are concerned Dent's still a little obscure (and hey I still wish were could have seen Lando Calrisident in the previous Batman movie series instead of Tommy Lee Two-Face).
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: a pretty girl is like on March 15, 2008, 06:50:46 AM
If Warner Bros. had Ed Wood's balls and vision, they would have gone with the exploit the dead guy route.

Still though, I'm gonna show that site to my step-daughter and see if she wants to get in on the action.  She's a Batman fangirl.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on March 15, 2008, 06:56:49 AM
Ah well, I guess growing up with Batman on the brain doesn't make me the best person to judge on this, all I know is I mentioned the site to several people at work, none of them nearly as geeky as I am, and all of them knew that Harvey Dent was Two-Face.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on March 15, 2008, 09:32:14 AM
Ah well, I guess growing up with Batman on the brain doesn't make me the best person to judge on this, all I know is I mentioned the site to several people at work, none of them nearly as geeky as I am, and all of them knew that Harvey Dent was Two-Face.

Dent was in that other terrible Batman movie wasn't he?

Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Gaseous Snake on March 15, 2008, 10:49:08 AM
Coulda swore Dent made an appearence in Batman , too. That's when he was played by Billy Dee Williams.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on March 15, 2008, 02:30:46 PM
You are correct hence:

(and hey I still wish were could have seen Lando Calrisident in the previous Batman movie series instead of Tommy Lee Two-Face).

I suppose I should have said "more of" since he's barely in Batman :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Gaseous Snake on March 15, 2008, 02:32:40 PM
You are correct hence:

(and hey I still wish were could have seen Lando Calrisident in the previous Batman movie series instead of Tommy Lee Two-Face).

I suppose I should have said "more of" since he's barely in Batman :)
Eh, I don't read any thread that requires more than one hand to count the pages. It's a flawed system...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on March 15, 2008, 02:34:21 PM
It's five posts above yours.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Gaseous Snake on March 15, 2008, 02:36:20 PM
It's five posts above yours.
Welp, I got nothing, then. Erm.. I believe in Harvey Dent, too?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on March 16, 2008, 10:39:16 PM
Homunculus' avatar is freaking me out.

Also, don't accidentally hold control while scrolling with the mouse wheel.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on April 07, 2008, 09:24:56 AM
[yt=425,350]D15iHxCvjBs[/yt]
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: doggans on April 07, 2008, 09:28:27 AM
What a horribly composited clip. :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 07, 2008, 10:54:51 AM
I had no idea The Dark Knight was a horror movie. Seriously, that was the Star Wars Holiday Special of Batman clips.

But in real seriouslyness, CHRIS NOLAN IS MURDERING THIS MOVIE WITH CHEESY VIRAL MARKETING. I'm sorry, any director with a vision would cut his own gall bladder out before allowing a videotaped boring as hell pointless youtube clip like that to even be conceived. If you want to learn how to properly sell out, look no further than Rifftrax local hero George Lucas. The merchandise is fun, even the fast food tie-ins. The commercials are usually funny, like the one with the alien collecting Episode I cans. I don't understand how the fuck this Dark Knight marketing is supposed to work. In an election year, who is paying attention to ads for a district attorney of a fictional city and not Daily Show clips of Clinton and Obama?? The point of viral marketing is not to be baffling and obscure, but to be intriguiing or just plain entertaining, and only be ambiguous about who made the damn clip. Jesus. You wouldn't think anything could make politics more boring, but someone working for The Dark Knight has actually found a way. It might just be ingenius. Call the Nobel people.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 07, 2008, 11:31:21 AM
Virus = usually bad! Maybe they need something more snappy, like... cancer marketing!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on April 07, 2008, 11:55:33 AM
Virus = usually bad! Maybe they need something more snappy, like... cancer marketing!

That could work. Cancer is the new AIDS, afterall.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: torgosPizza on April 24, 2008, 08:19:51 PM
Slick new poster.

(http://www.whysoserious.com/itsallpartoftheplan/images/201949id1_a.jpg)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 24, 2008, 08:27:03 PM
Did Batman do that? Man, what a dick. He's worse than the Crow.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: torgosPizza on April 24, 2008, 08:27:30 PM
I know. Maybe he's watched Fight Club one too many times.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on April 24, 2008, 08:48:33 PM
Slick new poster.

(http://www.whysoserious.com/itsallpartoftheplan/images/201949id1_a.jpg)

So, did EVERY SINGLE ACTOR in the film demand top billing on the poster, or what? :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 24, 2008, 08:49:22 PM
Aren't their heads supposed to be under their names in the wrong order?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: ScottotD on April 24, 2008, 10:52:46 PM
Seriously, we're reduced to dissing names on posters now?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 24, 2008, 11:20:50 PM
It's called RIFFING, buddy. You wanna get riffed? DO YOU??
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on April 25, 2008, 04:05:37 AM
Dude, that poster looks awesome, why do you guys diss this movie? all it is trying to do is entertain, you know, like movies are supposed to


Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on April 25, 2008, 05:10:05 AM
Slick new poster.

(http://www.whysoserious.com/itsallpartoftheplan/images/201949id1_a.jpg)

So, did EVERY SINGLE ACTOR in the film demand top billing on the poster, or what? :)

And see, when everyones first nobody is and they're all relegated to the bottom beneath that horrendous insurance claim, god I'd hate to be the claims adjuster that investigated that one.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on April 25, 2008, 05:32:57 AM
Dude, that poster looks awesome, why do you guys diss this movie? all it is trying to do is entertain, you know, like movies are supposed to

I certainly wouldn't speak for the bratty one, but last time I checked this was the RIFFTRAX forum. A certain amount of wryness or sarcasm is to be expected, no? I never said I didn't LIKE the poster - I was just pointing out the weirdness of having so many names at the bottom, all in the same size font. Usually they pick one or two "starship" names to carry the poster, and the other names are relegated to the fine print where they belong.

I'm picturing a bunch of actors sitting around a big round table with their agents in tow, screaming obscenities at the director and demanding their fair share, like some kind of meeting of the 7 families. ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on April 25, 2008, 05:42:43 AM
Well they aren't going to put anyone's name over Ledger's at this point, that's for sure.  Also putting those names together like that emphasizes that a lot of the strength of this movie is in the ensemble, not one single star, not a bad idea when you have Micheal Caine, Gary Oldman, and Morgan Freeman in there, any one of which can "supporting actor" the hell out of any movie they're in.

Also, they set this precedent with the previous movie already.

(http://www.hollywoodjesus.com/movie/batman_begins/poster.jpg)

Hmm, two movies in a row of being "AND Morgan Freeman"  If Chaos's scenario is accurate, it might be time for a new agent.   :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: ScottotD on April 25, 2008, 06:34:18 AM
they probably had to redesign it because of Ledger, I still think it's badass
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on April 25, 2008, 06:37:18 AM
I don't see how they would have to have redesigned it.  He was always going to get high billing.  Shoot, Nicholson got top billing when he played the role.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: ScottotD on April 25, 2008, 07:04:23 AM
and he sucked, hopefully they avoid that
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BathTub on April 25, 2008, 02:38:41 PM
Damn both of those posters are cool.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: skenderberg on April 25, 2008, 02:54:07 PM
Slick new poster.

(http://www.whysoserious.com/itsallpartoftheplan/images/201949id1_a.jpg)

So, did EVERY SINGLE ACTOR in the film demand top billing on the poster, or what? :)

And see, when everyones first nobody is and they're all relegated to the bottom beneath that horrendous insurance claim, god I'd hate to be the claims adjuster that investigated that one.
Speaking as claims examiner for the state of california, I wish I had that one in my caseload.  It looks like it would be loads more interesting than the boring "I stood up a lot and now my feet hurt" claims I usually do.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rude on April 25, 2008, 03:12:27 PM
Quote from: Chaos
I'm picturing a bunch of actors sitting around a big round table with their agents in tow, screaming obscenities at the director and demanding their fair share, like some kind of meeting of the 7 families. ;)

Gary Oldman: "I call the right testicle!"

Aaron Eckhart: "Damn! Alright... i'll take billing immediately below the left nad."

-Rude
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 25, 2008, 05:25:52 PM
Usually they pick one or two "starship" names
Yeah... like "Jefferson."

Well they aren't going to put anyone's name over Ledger's at this point, that's for sure
Hate to break it to you, but they already did. Names listed left to right are in order of billing, so Bale got top billing, Caine got second, and THEN Ledger. They wouldn't list them top to bottom, that would be silly. Frankly, I want Caine's agent, because he's just not that big a character in these films. He's the butler. How he gets second billing and Morgan Freeman gets and "AND Morgan Freeman" is beyond me. Maybe he got it in the first movie because of the popularity of the character (Alfred) versus the others (Razzle Ghoul, Scarecrow), and so he had to get it on this one too even though obviously Joker is more popular.

This is why, BTW, the names never line up with the faces. The names are a contract thing, but the order of the faces is up to the photographer and poster designer, and they're not obligated to compose a picture based on the credits.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on April 25, 2008, 11:03:45 PM
Usually they pick one or two "starship" names
Yeah... like "Jefferson."

Well they aren't going to put anyone's name over Ledger's at this point, that's for sure
Hate to break it to you, but they already did. Names listed left to right are in order of billing, so Bale got top billing, Caine got second, and THEN Ledger. They wouldn't list them top to bottom, that would be silly. Frankly, I want Caine's agent, because he's just not that big a character in these films. He's the butler. How he gets second billing and Morgan Freeman gets and "AND Morgan Freeman" is beyond me. Maybe he got it in the first movie because of the popularity of the character (Alfred) versus the others (Razzle Ghoul, Scarecrow), and so he had to get it on this one too even though obviously Joker is more popular.

This is why, BTW, the names never line up with the faces. The names are a contract thing, but the order of the faces is up to the photographer and poster designer, and they're not obligated to compose a picture based on the credits.

Never thought this day would come but I agree with Bratty on this.  Not gonna get into why because he already stated it , but, yeah, he's right on this.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on April 26, 2008, 01:06:53 AM
Usually they pick one or two "starship" names
Yeah... like "Jefferson."

Well they aren't going to put anyone's name over Ledger's at this point, that's for sure
Hate to break it to you, but they already did. Names listed left to right are in order of billing, so Bale got top billing, Caine got second, and THEN Ledger. They wouldn't list them top to bottom, that would be silly. Frankly, I want Caine's agent, because he's just not that big a character in these films. He's the butler. How he gets second billing and Morgan Freeman gets and "AND Morgan Freeman" is beyond me. Maybe he got it in the first movie because of the popularity of the character (Alfred) versus the others (Razzle Ghoul, Scarecrow), and so he had to get it on this one too even though obviously Joker is more popular.

This is why, BTW, the names never line up with the faces. The names are a contract thing, but the order of the faces is up to the photographer and poster designer, and they're not obligated to compose a picture based on the credits.

Never thought this day would come but I agree with Bratty on this.  Not gonna get into why because he already stated it , but, yeah, he's right on this.

I was thinking in terms of literally over.  Considering how many posters will have one or two names large prominent and at the top of the poster, then have a similar line of supporting actors below along with the directors and producers etc.  Yes Bale gets top billing because his name is first on the list, but it isn't actually above the others.  This at least makes the rest of the names seem more important than if they had the line to themselves and Christian Bale was listed over Batman's head or something.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: doggans on April 26, 2008, 06:15:14 AM
How he gets second billing and Morgan Freeman gets and "AND Morgan Freeman" is beyond me.

Granted, it's been a while since I've seen the first one, but I do recall Alfred having a lot more screen time than Lucius.

The "And" credit on a poster usually goes to the actor who's the biggest star in a supporting-yet-important role...so having "And" is much more prestigious than being the last guy before "And". It's really quite impressive! I've lived my whole life wanting to be the "And" guy on a movie cast!*

*not really, but still
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on April 26, 2008, 12:43:55 PM
Dude, that poster looks awesome, why do you guys diss this movie? all it is trying to do is entertain, you know, like movies are supposed to

I certainly wouldn't speak for the bratty one, but last time I checked this was the RIFFTRAX forum. A certain amount of wryness or sarcasm is to be expected, no? I never said I didn't LIKE the poster - I was just pointing out the weirdness of having so many names at the bottom, all in the same size font. Usually they pick one or two "starship" names to carry the poster, and the other names are relegated to the fine print where they belong.

I'm picturing a bunch of actors sitting around a big round table with their agents in tow, screaming obscenities at the director and demanding their fair share, like some kind of meeting of the 7 families. ;)

I'm sorry I didn't mean the poster, just pretty much everything that went up in this forum was shot at, I didn't mean anything by it, I was just curious, I could say the same thing about the new James Bond film
 
what I mean to say is,
"I still haven't figured out these 'Forum' things yet"
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on April 26, 2008, 12:45:03 PM
The "And" credit on a poster usually goes to the actor who's the biggest star in a supporting-yet-important role...so having "And" is much more prestigious than being the last guy before "And". It's really quite impressive! I've lived my whole life wanting to be the "And" guy on a movie cast!*

Wow... I never realized that "The Rest" from Gilligan's Island was a real person, and the biggest supporting actor to boot. ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: doggans on April 26, 2008, 01:06:49 PM
Wow... I never realized that "The Rest" from Gilligan's Island was a real person, and the biggest supporting actor to boot. ;)

Well, he did fade into obscurity after the show was canceled. But he did manage to get a lot of work on children's shows after changing his name to "Friends"..."Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends", "Barney and Friends", etc.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on April 26, 2008, 10:39:56 PM
Wow... I never realized that "The Rest" from Gilligan's Island was a real person, and the biggest supporting actor to boot. ;)

Well, he did fade into obscurity after the show was canceled. But he did manage to get a lot of work on children's shows after changing his name to "Friends"..."Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends", "Barney and Friends", etc.

It just sucks that he never got the screen time he deserved, eventually they just changed the theme to "The Professor and Mary Ann" so they'd stop getting people's hopes up about the scenes that ended up on the cutting room floor.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on April 28, 2008, 12:52:40 PM
4 new posters are out:

(http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x25/ManPushCart87/dark_knight_ver7.jpg)

(http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x25/ManPushCart87/dark_knight_ver8.jpg)

(http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x25/ManPushCart87/dark_knight_ver9.jpg)

(http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x25/ManPushCart87/dark_knight_ver10.jpg)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on April 28, 2008, 12:56:26 PM
Ah I see they're preparing to detect the flavour notes in the card, batarang and campaign button

(http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Arts/Arts_/site_furniture/2007/05/17/winewoman460.jpg)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: gbeenie on April 28, 2008, 01:20:35 PM
Dude, that poster looks awesome, why do you guys diss this movie? all it is trying to do is entertain, you know, like movies are supposed to

Don't be so touchy. Even if you're totally looking forward to this movie (I am), and you think the poster's great (I do) doesn't mean you can't have some fun with it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on April 28, 2008, 01:23:22 PM
Dude, that poster looks awesome, why do you guys diss this movie? all it is trying to do is entertain, you know, like movies are supposed to

Don't be so touchy. Even if you're totally looking forward to this movie (I am), and you think the poster's great (I do) doesn't mean you can't have some fun with it.

again, not really talking about the poster, just the thread in general, sorry, it wasn't meant to be touchy, just a question
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: gbeenie on April 28, 2008, 01:27:38 PM
I like the first and third of those posters a lot.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rude on April 28, 2008, 01:35:48 PM
...

The Joker one looks pretty cool, but the rest of 'em feel forced.

-Rude
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 28, 2008, 02:15:14 PM
You know it's funny.. with these sunglasses I'm wearing, those posters just say, "COLLECT THEM ALL! CONSUME! OBEY!"
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on April 28, 2008, 05:33:12 PM
you missed one  ;D
(http://www.worstpreviews.com/images/posters/thedarkknight/thedarkknight7_large.jpg)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: gbeenie on April 28, 2008, 05:37:05 PM
I think the cycle one would have worked better if they hadn't had him looking down at the "camera."
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on April 28, 2008, 05:44:47 PM
that's to reenforce his awesomeness
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on April 28, 2008, 05:46:28 PM
or work his lats.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: mrbasehart on April 28, 2008, 06:00:48 PM
I think Roger Christian shot that poster.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 28, 2008, 06:35:46 PM
batPod - Because sometimes you need to fucking kill people with machine guns.

This message brought to you by WayneTech.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on April 28, 2008, 07:04:29 PM
batPod - Because sometimes you need to fucking kill people with machine guns.

This message brought to you by WayneTech.

You misspelled the last thing.  WayneTech should have been FagTech if it's involving you in any way.  Or maybe you prefer CryingBitchTech?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BathTub on April 28, 2008, 07:08:44 PM
I think you need to chill a bit, Thorns of Crimson Death.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on April 28, 2008, 07:08:51 PM
quick, to the who'll snap next thread

I need some swirling Tripe.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 28, 2008, 07:37:37 PM
The first rule of Movie Talk is you do not talk about movies!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on April 28, 2008, 07:50:42 PM
The first rule of Movie Talk is you do not talk about movies!

Apparently your first rule about anything is to not acknowledge when you've been disrespected.  You can dish it out but can't take it.  Grow a pair already.  Or DIE.  Preferably the latter.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on April 28, 2008, 07:53:19 PM
I think you need to chill a bit, Thorns of Crimson Death.

No.  I refuse to when it comes to that asshole.  Seriously, he needs to learn to respect other people's opinions and shut the fuck up.  Sure, he's entitled to his own opinion, but he doesn't have to be such a fucking ignorant piece of shit about it.  No offense to you BathTub as I enjoy what you have to say, of course, but he needs a nice kick to the skull.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: torgosPizza on April 28, 2008, 08:55:02 PM
Yeah, you could probably tone it down a notch. Thanks.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GLaDOS on April 28, 2008, 10:21:23 PM
No.  I refuse to when it comes to that asshole.  Seriously, he needs to learn to respect other people's opinions and shut the fuck up.  Sure, he's entitled to his own opinion, but he doesn't have to be such a fucking ignorant piece of shit about it.  No offense to you BathTub as I enjoy what you have to say, of course, but he needs a nice kick to the skull.
Just be cool. If someone just says something you don't like just ignore them. That's all you have to do. Getting angry just helps to validate their opinion.

On the lighter side... I think I am more excited about The Dark Knight than any other movie ever made. I can't imagine this movie being a failure on any level at all. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: torgosPizza on April 28, 2008, 10:23:44 PM
I know - this is an awesome year. Iron Man and Indiana Jones I'm looking forward to... but not quite as much as TDK.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 28, 2008, 10:48:56 PM
I have never said anything about anyone else's opinions.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GLaDOS on April 28, 2008, 11:09:06 PM
I have never said anything about anyone else's opinions.
I may not know what has gone on before, but I know what Batman would do. He would find good things he has in common with his opponent and try to be friends.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 28, 2008, 11:15:54 PM
What?? Are you sure we're talking about the same Batman?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GLaDOS on April 29, 2008, 01:27:29 AM
What?? Are you sure we're talking about the same Batman?
I'm just trying my best to be diplomatic, even if it is complete bs.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: J-Proof on April 29, 2008, 09:09:25 AM
Unfortunately looking forward to more than one movie usually means I'll be disappointed by all but one of them....
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on April 29, 2008, 11:19:13 AM
one more
(http://www.worstpreviews.com/images/posters/thedarkknight/thedarkknight12_large.jpg)
 ;D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rude on April 29, 2008, 11:23:52 AM
...

That poster totally reminds me of the end of Fight Club.

-Rude
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rude on April 29, 2008, 01:47:29 PM
...

If watching a blurry bootleg version of the full trailer online is your kinda' thing... better go watch it while you can: here (http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2008/04/bootleg_dark_knight_trailer_fo.php).

-Rude
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 29, 2008, 01:59:52 PM
Now I have to see this movie just to find out why people hate that one building so much! (Please say it's a Transformer, please say it's a transformer!)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Variety of Cells on April 29, 2008, 03:27:06 PM
That one's actually cool.  Is that a bus poster? What's with the weird aspect ratio?

You didn't hear?  A few important scenes in the new batman were shot on 70mm and in triptych.  The optimal viewing environment will be a football stadium. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BathTub on April 29, 2008, 04:25:09 PM
Actually iirc didn't they actually shoot some scenes in imax?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Variety of Cells on April 29, 2008, 05:37:33 PM
Yeup.  That's what I was playing off of.  So if you see it, see it at an Imax because those scenes will look amazing (well i'm hoping they will anyway.) 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 29, 2008, 05:57:10 PM
Isn't IMAX taller than regular footage? Maybe that's why this building is in all the marketing. Maybe they show off all the floors in IMAX. Yeah, show me that fifth floor, you sexy building you!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on April 29, 2008, 06:04:25 PM
Actually yeah it is.  Most movies today have a 1.85:1 ratio, IMAX has a 1.43:1.  Even if the screens were the same width the IMAX image would be significantly taller.

I'm a geek.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 29, 2008, 06:05:07 PM
So it's like TV... only bigger.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on April 29, 2008, 06:07:29 PM
A standard tv has approximately a 1.3:1 ratio, so closer, but not quite.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 29, 2008, 06:09:06 PM
I know, it's close. It's not like you could tell if you sat that close to your TV.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on April 29, 2008, 06:14:43 PM
True, though if a movie switched from a TV shaped image to an IMAX image actually on an IMAX screen it'd be easy to see that difference.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on April 29, 2008, 07:53:37 PM
True, though if a movie switched from a TV shaped image to an IMAX image actually on an IMAX screen it'd be easy to see that difference.

Yeah, it would look like ass.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GLaDOS on April 30, 2008, 11:06:36 AM
With all the excitement and hype they have created for this movie they better damn well have their movie live up to it. I have no desire to see another Spiderman 3 or Revenge of the sith.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: David on April 30, 2008, 11:10:12 AM
The second one (this one) will be just fine; it is the third that will suck.

See: Spiderman, X-Men, Batman (90's continuity)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GLaDOS on April 30, 2008, 11:24:53 AM
The second one (this one) will be just fine; it is the third that will suck.
See: Spiderman, X-Men, Batman (90's continuity)
There may indeed be a curse at risk for ruining the third installment, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. What i'm trying to say is there's always an exception to the rule.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on April 30, 2008, 12:37:45 PM
Yeah, but X-men 3 was directed by the Rush Hour guy
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on April 30, 2008, 12:54:50 PM
To be fair though, they never did really hype anything about the movie's story, or even any scenes in particular. Just the movie itself and the new characters (mostly Joker). So as long as the Joker is in it, they weren't lying about anything.

If they had saved the Joker for the third one, not only might the third film actually be good for a change, Heath might still be alive. Pretty much anything after the Joker is bound to be a let down. Two-Face is basically only Half-Joker. Not really as cool.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on April 30, 2008, 01:01:10 PM
So I'm assuming that they're throwing out the old story of how it was the Joker who killed Bruce Wayne's parents in front of him as a child.  Seeing as it wasn't Heath Leger in "Begins" but some transient looking guy.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Doctor Who? on April 30, 2008, 01:03:57 PM
That was never the story to begin with.

That was just something stupid they added at the last minute to the first Batman movie.

In the comics we never find out who the Joker really is and that is one of the reasons he works as a villain.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on April 30, 2008, 01:16:21 PM
Ah, word. Thanks for the clarification.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GLaDOS on April 30, 2008, 01:21:45 PM
See, I didn't like the first Batman movie with Michael Keaton for a couple reasons: First, Michael Keaton was only playing the role as a favor to Tim Burton. Secondly, The Joker was a pussy. Batman Villains should at least be able to stand toe to toe with Batman. Tim Burton's lame treatment of Superhero Mythologies does not sit favorably with me.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rude on April 30, 2008, 01:42:28 PM
Quote from: Doctor Who?
In the comics we never find out who the Joker really is and that is one of the reasons he works as a villain.

Actually, we find out quite a few times... in quite a few different ways! Whether any of them are legit or not is a different story. But at this point, i'm not sure that even The Joker himself knows who he ever really was anymore.

I'm curious whether the new film will even bother with an "origin story." In a way... i kind of hope not. Apparently The Joker existed in that world at the end of the first film, so i assume that any origin would have to be a flashback (which is lame.) And in one of the trailers it seems like the police picked him up, and have no idea who he is. I guess we'll see...

-Rude
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GLaDOS on April 30, 2008, 04:24:19 PM
Quote from: Doctor Who?
In the comics we never find out who the Joker really is and that is one of the reasons he works as a villain.
Actually, we find out quite a few times... in quite a few different ways! Whether any of them are legit or not is a different story. But at this point, i'm not sure that even The Joker himself knows who he ever really was anymore.
I'm curious whether the new film will even bother with an "origin story." In a way... i kind of hope not. Apparently The Joker existed in that world at the end of the first film, so i assume that any origin would have to be a flashback (which is lame.) And in one of the trailers it seems like the police picked him up, and have no idea who he is. I guess we'll see...
-Rude
Actually, it's Lee Ermey who picks up the clown faced guy and mistakes him for Private joker and goes on to kick the shit out of him.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on April 30, 2008, 04:28:13 PM
But at this point, i'm not sure that even The Joker himself knows who he ever really was anymore.

I remember there's a quote to that effect in one of the comics from the Joker himself, but I can't remember the exact issue.  It was something along the lines of "Some days I remember it one way, some days another.  If I'm going to have a past I prefer it to be multiple choice."
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: ImOscardotcom on April 30, 2008, 04:30:33 PM
But at this point, i'm not sure that even The Joker himself knows who he ever really was anymore.

I remember there's a quote to that effect in one of the comics from the Joker himself, but I can't remember the exact issue.  It was something along the lines of "Some days I remember it one way, some days another.  If I'm going to have a past I prefer it to be multiple choice."

Pretty sure it's The Killing Joke.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: lefty081577 on April 30, 2008, 08:41:25 PM
http://www.filmdrunk.com/post.phtml?pk=1633   ok am i crazy or is this legit, found byway of fark
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Nick on April 30, 2008, 08:56:16 PM
No, it's not legit. Read further down on the link. Although it is a clever video. :D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on May 01, 2008, 06:03:12 AM
Just the fact there's so many similar shots to edit together like that is impressive.  Very interesting.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: doggans on May 01, 2008, 11:23:20 AM
The guy who made that posts on two other forums I frequent. He was a little shocked at how viral it became, all due to people mistaking it for the real deal. :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on May 05, 2008, 02:31:45 PM
Quote
LA Times got the chance to speak to Aaron Eckhart, who dropped a few hints about the Two-Face character from the upcoming "The Dark Knight."

"I can tell you that, basically, when you look at Two-Face, you should get sick to your stomach," he explained. "Being the guy under all that, well, that was a lot of fun for me. It's like you would feel if you met someone whose face had pretty much been ripped off or burned off with acid. I can't talk about it beyond that because I don't want to give away too much of the plans by Chris [Nolan]."

One aspect of the character that's very different from what fans have previously seen is that his wounds are structurally deeper. "There are fans on the Internet who have done artist's versions of what they think it will look like," said Eckhart. "And I can tell you this: They're thinking small; Chris is going way farther than people think."

Two-Face in the film is more of a vigilante hunting down the Joker than he is a criminal, as he has most often been portrayed in the comics. His trademark is flipping a two-headed coin, one side defaced, the other pristine, and letting its landing determine his actions, often in situations where he has a gun to someone's head.

"The difference between Batman and Two-Face is how far they are willing to go and how they make their point," Eckhart said. "Otherwise, we're talking about vigilante crime-fighting. That's what Batman is all about. He has a strong sense of justice. And Harvey Dent has an extremely strong sense of justice. His fiancée is killed. He's horribly injured. But he is still true to himself. He's a crime fighter, he's not killing good people. He's not a bad guy, not purely."
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Raven on May 05, 2008, 02:38:19 PM
I didn't think that Two-Face was actually two-face in this one.  I thought it was a set up for the 3rd movie.  Now I'm even more interested... if that was possible anyway.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on May 05, 2008, 04:21:03 PM
From what I had understood, this movie is about the origins of Two-Face, so it is basically following the arc of Dent becoming Two-Face. So yeah, by the end, he should be transformed and showing us what he is all about with the split personalities and so forth.

Should be a good show.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: robertraur on May 05, 2008, 04:30:45 PM
Just in case you wanted to see what two face looks like, aintitcool has posted an image of his bad side.  I should note this is very spoilery:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/36628 (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/36628)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on May 05, 2008, 04:38:06 PM
if that's real, then they show you what happens to him in the new trailer
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: torgosPizza on May 05, 2008, 05:06:08 PM
Am not looking at your spoilery photo. I would like to be somewhat surprised going in :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on May 05, 2008, 05:08:34 PM
I've seen so many pictures of what it's supposed to be like at this point, that's actually pretty tame by comparison.  From what they've been saying I doubt that's the real (or the complete) effect.

Edit:  On second look, bit more ghastly than the first glance I took, but that looks like just the "physical" part of the makeup/CG melding they were talking about.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Raven on May 05, 2008, 06:15:41 PM
Looks pretty decent to me.  If that's not the full effect then I look forward to it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on May 05, 2008, 07:20:40 PM
Chris Nolan sure is a master at making attractive characters look so ugly that you don't want to watch them. I'm sure there must be a name for that disorder. Shouldn'tbeallowedtodirecteveragainitis?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: torgosPizza on May 05, 2008, 07:38:55 PM
From what I've read it's an early concept. They are saying that it's real, but it's not exactly what the onscreen / finished effect looks like.

Chris Nolan sure is a master at making attractive characters look so ugly that you don't want to watch them. I'm sure there must be a name for that disorder. Shouldn'tbeallowedtodirecteveragainitis?

 :rimshot:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on May 05, 2008, 08:14:08 PM
Freddy Krueger, Darkman, The Mummy, Darth Vader... Phantom of the Opera... Vanilla Sky... that one episode of Monk... there's just no reason for them to screw this up.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: eye_strain on May 05, 2008, 08:43:46 PM
Well no one reason anyway....
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GLaDOS on May 06, 2008, 05:36:36 PM
Chris Nolan sure is a master at making attractive characters look so ugly that you don't want to watch them. I'm sure there must be a name for that disorder. Shouldn'tbeallowedtodirecteveragainitis?
The medical suffix -itis indicates inflammation. If you want a more accurate word depicting someone who should never direct again, I would suggest a Schumacherectomy. As in a complete removal(ectomy) of Joel Schumacher. As for Chris Nolan, hell the man made the best Batman film ever, and I see no reason why your suggestion should have any merit.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on May 06, 2008, 05:46:37 PM
Chris Nolan sure is a master at making attractive characters look so ugly that you don't want to watch them. I'm sure there must be a name for that disorder. Shouldn'tbeallowedtodirecteveragainitis?
The medical suffix -itis indicates inflammation. If you want a more accurate word depicting someone who should never direct again, I would suggest a Schumacherectomy. As in a complete removal(ectomy) of Joel Schumacher. As for Chris Nolan, hell the man made the best Batman film ever, and I see no reason why your suggestion should have any merit.
He has internet access, and he's angry at the world.  Therefore we must all listen.   ;D

(I smell a new villain for Schumacher's next superhero film)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: torgosPizza on May 06, 2008, 06:14:05 PM
He has internet access, and he's angry at the world.  Therefore we must all listen.   ;D

You forgot "thinks he's funny."
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on May 06, 2008, 06:16:36 PM
He has internet access, and he's angry at the world.  Therefore we must all listen.   ;D

You forgot "thinks he's funny."

My mistake, how silly of me.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on May 06, 2008, 06:18:28 PM
I don't think the King of NegativityTM is all that bad, I mean there are worse posters out there.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GLaDOS on May 06, 2008, 06:20:14 PM
there are worse posters out there.
oh... I see...  :(
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on May 06, 2008, 06:22:08 PM
Not you you sweet little asexual industrial robotics thing you  :-*
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on May 06, 2008, 06:25:03 PM
I would support osis.

Itis is the only suffix that most remember, but many forget what it indicates.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on May 06, 2008, 06:25:22 PM
Heh, there's always at least one worse poster out there, just like there's always at least one person better at a game then you, or at least one person that makes more off an investment or can run faster and jump higher.  That's why championships change hands.  With enough effort, I think our boy here could hold the "worst poster" title at least once in his career.

So anyway, about this new Batman movie I've been hearing about...the different direction they've been talking about for Harvey's character intrigues me.

(Think I've convinced a friend of mine to be Two-Face for Halloween this year, meaning I might get to design his scar makeup.)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on May 06, 2008, 06:33:11 PM
Heh, there's always at least one worse poster out there, just like there's always at least one person better at a game then you, or at least one person that makes more off an investment or can run faster and jump higher.  That's why championships change hands.  With enough effort, I think our boy here could hold the "worst poster" title at least once in his career.

So anyway, about this new Batman movie I've been hearing about...the different direction they've been talking about for Harvey's character intrigues me.

(Think I've convinced a friend of mine to be Two-Face for Halloween this year, meaning I might get to design his scar makeup.)

Yikes.  Gonna go with this version? I have a dremel you can borrow...

Probably not, will likely do what I did with my Joker makeup and mix sources between movies/cartoon/comics until it looks right.  I mean I'm planning to bring back the Joker suit this year for my costume and I'm not going with this movie's take on it.  Seems cool, and I can't wait to see it, but I'll still want to be the "classic" Joker.

For 'ol Harvey, anything I can't do with a latex appliance and pax paint will probably be left behind.   :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bratpop on May 07, 2008, 12:34:57 AM
He has internet access, and he's angry at the world.  Therefore we must all listen.   ;D

You forgot "thinks he's funny."

torgosPizza, I have never found a single thing you've ever posted even slightly amusing, so I guess we're even.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on May 07, 2008, 05:30:28 AM
He has internet access, and he's angry at the world.  Therefore we must all listen.   ;D

You forgot "thinks he's funny."

torgosPizza, I have never found a single thing you've ever posted even slightly amusing, so I guess we're even.

Of course, the fatal flaw in this logic is that you only THINK you're funny, so obviously your opinion of what IS funny would also be flawed. Except Carrot Top - nobody thinks that idiot is funny.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on May 07, 2008, 05:31:31 AM
so, he's kinda like the Joker, only his jokes aren't as good
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on May 07, 2008, 07:48:45 AM
such is the life of prop comics
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on May 07, 2008, 10:31:14 AM
such is the life of prop comics

I been down that road......... :'(
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Cosmic Muse on May 09, 2008, 08:26:33 AM
torgosPizza, I have never found a single thing you've ever posted even slightly amusing, so I guess we're even.

It looks like somebody is just begging to get banned for acting like a jerk towards an Administrator.

so, he's kinda like the Joker, only his jokes aren't as good

Blasphemy!!! Don't insult the Clown Prince of Crime that way! Actually he's probably one rung below Pauly Shore in terms of comedic genius.


Anyways, on a more positive, well relatively positive nonvitriolic note, I am excited to see what Nolan has in store for us with the Dark Knight. It'll be interesting to see such different takes on two characters who've been portrayed by other actors. IMHO Tommy Lee Jones could have been a great Two Face but he was saddled with a director that was going for the Bang Zowie quality of the 60's Batman series. Not the interpretation that would favor the dark origins of this character. This struck me today though. I was talking with my mother and the only reason she's hesitant to go see this movie is because of Heath Ledger. She told me he's just too creepy and that she believes it was this role that lead to his accidental overdose.

Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on May 09, 2008, 08:31:45 AM
It kinda was
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on May 09, 2008, 12:56:31 PM
This might have been the trigger, but I think it's obvious there were problems there already.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Cosmic Muse on May 10, 2008, 11:29:13 AM
Well, like I said this was what my mother old me as far as her reasons for not watching The Dark Knight. I'n definitely going to be there though because the best tribute to Heath Ledger would be to see his wonderful performance in this movie.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on May 17, 2008, 08:05:53 AM
 (http://www.worstpreviews.com/images/posters/thedarkknight/thedarkknight13_large.jpg)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on June 25, 2008, 12:57:58 PM
Peter Travers at Rolling Stone gives it 3.5 out of 4 stars.

Review contains spoilers:

http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/movie/16155928/review/21477208/the_dark_knight

but the first & last paragraphs are fairly harmless:

Quote
Heads up: a thunderbolt is about to rip into the blanket of bland we call summer movies. The Dark Knight, director Christopher Nolan's absolute stunner of a follow-up to 2005's Batman Begins, is a potent provocation decked out as a comic-book movie. Feverish action? Check. Dazzling spectacle? Check. Devilish fun? Check. But Nolan is just warming up. There's something raw and elemental at work in this artfully imagined universe. Striking out from his Batman origin story, Nolan cuts through to a deeper dimension. Huh? Wha? How can a conflicted guy in a bat suit and a villain with a cracked, painted-on clown smile speak to the essentials of the human condition? Just hang on for a shock to the system. The Dark Knight creates a place where good and evil — expected to do battle — decide instead to get it on and dance. "I don't want to kill you," Heath Ledger's psycho Joker tells Christian Bale's stalwart Batman. "You complete me." Don't buy the tease. He means it.
...

No fair giving away the mysteries of The Dark Knight. It's enough to marvel at the way Nolan — a world-class filmmaker, be it Memento, Insomnia or The Prestige — brings pop escapism whisper-close to enduring art. It's enough to watch Bale chillingly render Batman as a lost warrior, evoking Al Pacino in The Godfather II in his delusion and desolation. It's enough to see Ledger conjure up the anarchy of the Sex Pistols and A Clockwork Orange as he creates a Joker for the ages. Go ahead, bitch about the movie being too long, at two and a half hours, for short attention spans (it is), too somber for the Hulk crowd (it is), too smart for its own good (it isn't). The haunting and visionary Dark Knight soars on the wings of untamed imagination. It's full of surprises you don't see coming. And just try to get it out of your dreams.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BathTub on June 25, 2008, 08:08:14 PM
Sounds Good.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: ScottotD on June 25, 2008, 08:27:42 PM
so.... excited.... can't.... wait...  :scared:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Rude on June 25, 2008, 08:30:53 PM
Quote from: ScottH
so.... excited.... can't.... wait...  :scared:

That post just goes so perfectly with your avatar. It's like you're literally bursting with antici... pation!

-Rude
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: ScottotD on June 25, 2008, 08:42:08 PM
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee... KaBOOM!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GLaDOS on June 25, 2008, 09:31:44 PM
I envy you. I will never know what it feels like for my head to explode. I am going to see Dark Knight midnight opening.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on June 26, 2008, 08:11:37 AM
We're driving all the way to Halifax (300 miles) to see it in a real theater this weekend. This will be the first movie I have seen in the theaters on opening weekend in about 5 years... and the first movie I have seen in the theaters period in about a year.

There's no theater here, and we don't get out much. :P

Add me to the list of people whose heads are pending explosion with anticipation. ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GLaDOS on June 26, 2008, 03:10:41 PM
We're driving all the way to Halifax (300 miles) to see it in a real theater this weekend. This will be the first movie I have seen in the theaters on opening weekend in about 5 years... and the first movie I have seen in the theaters period in about a year.
There's no theater here, and we don't get out much. :P
Add me to the list of people whose heads are pending explosion with anticipation. ;)
Chaos... I bet I'll get to see it before you.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: MSTJedi on June 26, 2008, 07:04:08 PM
We're driving all the way to Halifax (300 miles) to see it in a real theater this weekend. This will be the first movie I have seen in the theaters on opening weekend in about 5 years... and the first movie I have seen in the theaters period in about a year.
There's no theater here, and we don't get out much. :P
Add me to the list of people whose heads are pending explosion with anticipation. ;)
Chaos... I bet I'll get to see it before you.

Depends on what time zone you're in.

And while I probably won't be able to see this on opening night - babysitters are so hard to find - I am looking forward to this.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on June 26, 2008, 09:00:35 PM
I'm not the biggest fan of Batman to begin with, but what Nolan did with "Begins", I became a believer.  I admit that the mid 90's versions jaded me and I really couldn't take the "Batman" name seriously until the last movie, which was superb.  Nor was I ever keen on the idea of Ledger being the Joker when I first heard he was casted for the role until I saw quality previews of him and am now convinced his performance will be epic.

All that being said, there's really not a god-damn reason why this shouldn't be the best movie I see all summer.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Fortis on June 26, 2008, 09:01:54 PM
I'm not the biggest fan of Batman to begin with, but what Nolan did with "Begins", I became a believer.  I admit that the mid 90's versions jaded me and I really couldn't take the "Batman" name seriously until the last movie, which was superb.  Nor was I ever keen on the idea of Ledger being the Joker when I first heard he was casted for the role until I saw quality previews of him and am now convinced his performance will be epic.

All that being said, there's really not a god-damn reason why this shouldn't be the best movie I see all summer.

what you said
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on June 27, 2008, 07:55:37 AM
'Dark Knight' adds tribute to Ledger (http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/06/27/ledger.dark.knight.ap/index.html)

Quote
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Heath Ledger is getting a fond tribute from his collaborators on "The Dark Knight."

The end credits of the "Batman Begins" sequel include a farewell note to Ledger, who died in January from an accidental overdose of prescription drugs; and to special-effects technician Conway Wickliffe, who was killed last September in a stunt-car accident.

"In memory of our friends Heath Ledger & Conway Wickliffe," reads the tribute included in the credits, which went up Thursday on the Warner Bros. publicity Web site.

Ledger plays the villainous Joker in "The Dark Knight," who begins a reign of terror on Gotham City that pits him against conflicted hero Batman (Christian Bale).

Arriving in theaters July 18, the movie reteams Bale with director Christopher Nolan and returning co-stars Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and Gary Oldman. Joining the cast are Aaron Eckhart and Maggie Gyllenhaal.

Beginning months before Ledger's death, his frenetic performance and demented-clown makeup have been a cornerstone of the marketing campaign for the film.

"I needed a phenomenal actor, but he also had to be someone unafraid of taking on such an iconic role," Nolan says in the production notes for "The Dark Knight." "Heath created something entirely original. It's stunning, it's captivating. ... It's going to blow people away."
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 04, 2008, 08:17:31 AM
Michael Bay's rejected Dark Night script
(http://api.ning.com/files/X74qg0a9gKnpHENffbsjDDQYebwSOzt3UR1n0yOWfLYZUFM5xpgHwEclmWGClITHi-jbe*sGbfGGH6q3UmMYt4xst6GmKrxW/1complete.jpg)http://my.spill.com/profiles/blog/show?id=947994%3ABlogPost%3A355506 (http://my.spill.com/profiles/blog/show?id=947994%3ABlogPost%3A355506)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 04, 2008, 08:20:46 AM
so.... excited.... can't.... wait...  :scared:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 04, 2008, 10:58:19 AM
Quote
Besides "The Dark Knight," "Transformers" and "Spider-Man 3," I cannot remember too many movies where fans were so interested in every bit of marketing for a film, which is only weeks away from release. Posts about "Hellboy 2" and "The Mummy 3" are barely getting noticed, while the smallest pieces of news about "The Dark Knight" are being read by an astounding amount of people. So to keep up with demand, we bring you the latest on the "Batman Begins" sequel.

The upcoming issue of Entertainment Weekly has a cover which features the faces of Batman (Christian Bale) and The Joker (Heath Ledger). When looking inside, readers will find an article about Ledger's great performance and the tragedy that followed. Here are a few clips from the article:

"Robin Williams, Sean Penn, and even Mark Hamill were rumored to be on Nolan's short list (at least Hamill had practice, having voiced the Joker in various superhero cartoons). What nobody knew at the time, though, was just how short the director's list was. 'Heath was the only one on it,' Nolan insists. 'I knew he was it from the start.'"

"'I know there are these rumors out there that playing the Joker drove him to his grave,' [Gary Oldman] says. 'But I never saw anything of that. He was always on time. He knew his part backwards and forwards. I just thought he was a really sweet kid.'"
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: mrbasehart on July 04, 2008, 09:23:47 PM
There's an advanced review of the movie over at IGN.com.  They gave it 10 out of 10 and say it's the best comic book movie ever made.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GLaDOS on July 04, 2008, 11:00:27 PM
Yeah, I think that's the only movie IGN ever gave a 5/5 to.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Variety of Cells on July 04, 2008, 11:52:38 PM
I just read the American Cinematographer article on The Dark Knight, and it kept giving me goosebumps.  i've never seen anything in 70mm that wasn't a nature documentary before.  The depth of field will be so insanely shallow.... god I'm excited.  In the article they said all of the production design and all of the makeup had to be so intricate because there is so much detail in 70mm. 

Oh, and you know that semi that flips over in the trailer?  That was all real.

I've already ordered my tickets to see it in an Imax theater.  It sounds like the aspect ratio will change a bit when it goes from 35 to 70, but I have a feeling it won't be too jarring when they cut between the two.  And i don't think they are using all of the height of the 70mm frame.  It will be taller than the 35mm portion, but not by the full amount... i don't think.  Around 30 minutes of 70mm made it into the final cut, which includes the first scene and the last along with some big action scenes in the middle. 

You would be doing yourself an injustice if you're pretty sure you'll like the film and decide not to see it at an Imax.  70mm doesn't come along every day in Hollywood, for a good reason.  Those 30 minutes of 70mm made the film almost 4 times as expensive as it would have been normally.  This is not a film you watch on the subway with your 2 inch ipod screen and your crappy little earbuds.  This film is made to be watched on a 72 foot screen with surround sound that kicks your ass.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: GLaDOS on July 05, 2008, 01:11:28 AM
I think it is quite possible this film will sweep the Oscars in every category.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Shinigami on July 07, 2008, 10:22:06 AM
Well, our IMAX theater got trashed in the flood, so I'll have to go to Rochester if I want to see this in IMAX, which it seems I might HAVE to.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Variety of Cells on July 07, 2008, 01:11:24 PM
Well, our IMAX theater got trashed in the flood, so I'll have to go to Rochester if I want to see this in IMAX, which it seems I might HAVE to.

You better, or else be prepared to face the full force of my measured and understanding criticism.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on July 07, 2008, 01:15:56 PM
I don't know, I've seen a few non documentaries in IMAX it always seems ill used adding not much more that a few more dollars to the ticket price.

Now I do have antimetropia  so that might be robbing me of the full experience, but I seem to enjoy the real IMAX movies OK.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Variety of Cells on July 07, 2008, 01:32:24 PM
I don't know, I've seen a few non documentaries in IMAX it always seems ill used adding not much more that a few more dollars to the ticket price.

Now I do have antimetropia  so that might be robbing me of the full experience, but I seem to enjoy the real IMAX movies OK.

What did you see?  I'm not too excited about having to keep moving my head to see everything, which is why i haven't bothered to see any films that originated on 35 in an IMAX.  However, it might provide for a more engaging experience, especially if there is the additional quality.  Plus, The Dark Knight was intended to be shown in an IMAX, so i'm assuming they will be putting a lot more care into the 70mm transfer.

The only film i know off the top of my head that was shot all in 70 mm was Hamlet, which I sadly never had the chance to see.  Were the films you saw printed up to 70mm, or were they shot on 70mm?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck on July 07, 2008, 01:33:55 PM
I think it is quite possible this film will sweep the Oscars in every category.
They'll hate it because it made money...it will sweep the Effects categories.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on July 07, 2008, 03:56:05 PM
I don't know, I've seen a few non documentaries in IMAX it always seems ill used adding not much more that a few more dollars to the ticket price.

Now I do have antimetropia  so that might be robbing me of the full experience, but I seem to enjoy the real IMAX movies OK.

What did you see?  I'm not too excited about having to keep moving my head to see everything, which is why i haven't bothered to see any films that originated on 35 in an IMAX.  However, it might provide for a more engaging experience, especially if there is the additional quality.  Plus, The Dark Knight was intended to be shown in an IMAX, so i'm assuming they will be putting a lot more care into the 70mm transfer.

The only film i know off the top of my head that was shot all in 70 mm was Hamlet, which I sadly never had the chance to see.  Were the films you saw printed up to 70mm, or were they shot on 70mm?

Superman Returns,

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

A few others, trying to remember them off the top of my head. Not sure about whether they were filmed intentionally for 70mm or not though.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Variety of Cells on July 07, 2008, 04:09:36 PM
Superman Returns,

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

A few others, trying to remember them off the top of my head. Not sure about whether they were filmed intentionally for 70mm or not though.

Nope, superman was shot on video and Charlie was a blow up as well.  So you really aren't able to see any new information, it's just bigger, and a little grainer.  Neither took into account the different framing necessary for 70mm.  So my hopes are still high for The Dark Knight.

After a little research, it seems there hasn't been anything shot entirely in 70mm since Hamlet over 10 years ago, and only a few films that used it for a couple scenes, none of which were big hollywood productions. 

EDIT: after doing some more research, some of them have been big hollywood films, but 70mm was only used to get more information when doing special effects work.  So I'm assuming it was all stuff in a studio against a green screen, and not on location 70mm.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on July 07, 2008, 04:12:09 PM
Well that may absolutely be the case then. Well let me know how it is and I might give it another go :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Shinigami on July 07, 2008, 05:27:34 PM
Yeah, I've seen movies in IMAX before.  I've been mostly impressed, particularly with the sound.  Once you train yourself to move your eyes and not your neck, the full panoramic view is quite immersive.  The problem is that there's TOO much clarity, most of the time you are looking at the pores on people's faces.  Fact of the matter is, you don't stand that close to people in real life.  That being said, I'm confident that The Dark Knight will use the medium effectively.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: torgosPizza on July 07, 2008, 09:15:17 PM
Must read:

Michael Bay's The Dark Knight (http://my.spill.com/profiles/blog/show?id=947994%3ABlogPost%3A355506)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Nick on July 07, 2008, 10:03:00 PM
I almost want to see that movie made now. It would be all like whoosh! And then Graaaww!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: gbeenie on July 08, 2008, 07:17:10 AM
I was already made of squeee! over this movie; the reviews are just making me antsy in the pantsy. Hurry up, next weekend!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on July 08, 2008, 01:44:53 PM
varietyofcells:

I found this article (http://www.ifmagazine.com/new.asp?article=6466), which mentions how the blu-ray will feature "shifting aspect ratios". 

I'm not sure what this means....does it mean that in the theater, the IMAX portions are in a different aspect ratio than the rest of the film, and that the blu-ray will have the capability to change aspect ratios on the fly (like in the theater), while the regular DVD will have to crop these portions?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on July 08, 2008, 02:03:48 PM
In answer to my own question, take a look at this great article over at wired (http://www.wired.com/entertainment/hollywood/magazine/16-07/ff_darknight?currentPage=1).
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Nuke Mayhem on July 08, 2008, 10:18:05 PM
Just saw the anime tie-in movie. "Batman - Gotham Night". Pretty freaking cool movie. I noticed some animation styles similar to what was in The Animatrix, and I think the one called "Field Test" about magnetic bullet shield was animated by the same guys behind the anime series "Death Note".  It's a pretty good, should it get riffed? I don't know.

Also, check out the preview of the Wonder Woman movie coming soon. It looks good.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Variety of Cells on July 08, 2008, 10:42:14 PM
In answer to my own question, take a look at this great article over at wired (http://www.wired.com/entertainment/hollywood/magazine/16-07/ff_darknight?currentPage=1).

Great article.  So now they are comparing some of it to dog day afternoon?  I don't know, it gets me excited but i'm scared that i'm getting too excited now.  They all talk about it so seriously, but it really is just a super hero movie.  But all of the theory and intention behind it sounds sooooo good.  Can't help but be excited. 

And yes, in the Imax theater it will switch back and forth slightly between different aspect ratios.  I doubt it will do very much except change the size of the frame when you watch it on your hd tv, but at least they are preserving all of the frame, even if the detail isn't there.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Shinigami on July 10, 2008, 02:39:08 PM
woot, today I picked up advance tickets for the midnight premiere.  Me and some friends are gonna have a premiere party and possibly do Joker makeup.  It's gonna be pretty friggin sweet.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 10, 2008, 03:57:37 PM
woot, today I picked up advance tickets for the midnight premiere.  Me and some friends are gonna have a premiere party and possibly do Joker makeup.  It's gonna be pretty friggin sweet.

NICE.  Enjoy the film and your party, which sounds AWESOME, by the way.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 10, 2008, 04:06:00 PM
woot, today I picked up advance tickets for the midnight premiere.  Me and some friends are gonna have a premiere party and possibly do Joker makeup.  It's gonna be pretty friggin sweet.

NICE.  Enjoy the film and your party, which sounds AWESOME, by the way.

Yeah, don't mind us pathetic jerks holding our wanks.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on July 10, 2008, 04:19:36 PM
woot, today I picked up advance tickets for the midnight premiere.  Me and some friends are gonna have a premiere party and possibly do Joker makeup.  It's gonna be pretty friggin sweet.

I'm debating pulling my Joker costume out for this, but I don't want to be the only one in my group dressed up
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BBQ Platypus on July 13, 2008, 02:10:49 PM
Geez....I'm starting to get worried I won't be able to get into a midnight showing.  I've never bought tickets in advance before.  There's a first time for everything, I guess...

(And if that doesn't work, I could always kill someone and steal their tickets).
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Cosmic Muse on July 13, 2008, 02:52:07 PM
woot, today I picked up advance tickets for the midnight premiere.  Me and some friends are gonna have a premiere party and possibly do Joker makeup.  It's gonna be pretty friggin sweet.

I'm debating pulling my Joker costume out for this, but I don't want to be the only one in my group dressed up

I'd dress all Gothy with my thick makeup if you were to come up here to where I live. I'm seeing TDK next Friday.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: torgosPizza on July 13, 2008, 03:01:11 PM
Just got my tix for the 9am IMAX show here (next saturday morning). Can't wait.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on July 14, 2008, 09:24:47 AM
Just got my tix for the 9am IMAX show here (next saturday morning). Can't wait.

I just bought tickets for the first Sunday morning IMAX showing here in Madison.  I guess I should feel lucky that I live only 2 miles from an IMAX theater, I've heard some people are driving hundreds of miles to come here to see it in IMAX.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BBQ Platypus on July 14, 2008, 02:56:21 PM
I like how nobody even commented on my open admission of the fact that I would gladly kill another human being for tickets to this movie.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on July 14, 2008, 04:57:15 PM
I like how nobody even commented on my open admission of the fact that I would gladly kill another human being for tickets to this movie.

We all know Batman'll stop you before it comes to that.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 14, 2008, 05:08:47 PM
I like how nobody even commented on my open admission of the fact that I would gladly kill another human being for tickets to this movie.

We all know Batman'll stop you before it comes to that.

Besides, it's not like no one else has thought of that option  ;D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on July 15, 2008, 07:43:30 AM
What surprises me is that YOU were surprised by our cavalier acceptance of your statement. ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Cosmic Muse on July 15, 2008, 07:47:33 AM
Oh my God, the anticipation factor for this movie is at critical mass for me. I am just so jazzed to see this movie.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: TheUnabeefer on July 15, 2008, 09:32:58 AM
I like how nobody even commented on my open admission of the fact that I would gladly kill another human being for tickets to this movie.

We all know Batman'll stop you before it comes to that.

Besides, it's not like no one else has thought of that option  ;D

Yeah... uhm... **cough**  I already beat some kid senseless with a baseball bat and took her tickets.  I am pretty sure she's not dead though...  was moaning as I ran off.

That's in the spirit of Batman, right?!  Or did I misunderstand something?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Dim of the Yard on July 15, 2008, 10:01:00 AM
I purchased my midnight showing ticket on Saturday.  I'm heading out with one of my best girl friends, who I haven't seen in about half a year.  It looks like this is going to be, oddly enough, a girl's night out.  And a hell of a girl's night out it's going to be!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on July 15, 2008, 10:10:55 AM
Well it's our Anniversary on Saturday so Ann and I might postpone seeing this till Sunday.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: a pretty girl is like on July 15, 2008, 12:26:13 PM
Well it's our Anniversary on Saturday so Ann and I might postpone seeing this till Sunday.

*whiplash sound*  ;) 

I kid.

I guess it is a somewhat strange anniversary date.  "Here's to us!  And now to watch a homicidal clown terrorize a city for 2 hours."
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on July 15, 2008, 12:28:17 PM
You know, if I put it just that way, Ann might go for that ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Hebs on July 15, 2008, 12:28:58 PM
AHHH so excited - we can't wait!  

The theaters here have literally stopped playing EVERY MOVIE BESDIES Dark Knight - the listing for Friday is literally all Batmans.  
We're hoping to hit a showing while it's still light out to avoid those crazy teenagers.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thom_Serveaux on July 15, 2008, 09:17:53 PM
Who I still feel sorry for is Raul Julia, whose last film was that Craptacular Van Dammit Street Fighter.  Where as Heath gets to end his career with Dark Night.  That really Sucks.  I mean even Phil Hartman got to do Kiki's Delivery Service, which I enjoyed.  But to have Street fighter be my last pic?  It'd be enough to drive some to suicide, no offense...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 15, 2008, 10:10:10 PM
Who I still feel sorry for is Raul Julia, whose last film was that Craptacular Van Dammit Street Fighter.  Where as Heath gets to end his career with Dark Night.  That really Sucks.  I mean even Phil Hartman got to do Kiki's Delivery Service, which I enjoyed.  But to have Street fighter be my last pic?  It'd be enough to drive some to suicide, no offense...

I agree with you.  Street Fighter would be a TERRIBLE last film to have.  That movie was such bullshit it was fucking reprehensible.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Pak-Man on July 15, 2008, 11:29:56 PM
Look at poor Orson Wells. He goes out with Transformers: The Movie. I mean, sure it's better than Street Fighter, but look at the man's past!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Raven on July 16, 2008, 12:04:12 AM
1.  Well, when production started my best friend from High School called me up and said we should go on the Saturday of opening weekend so nobody had to take off work.  Bought those tickets the first day you could. 

2.  My fiance's friend has to work on Saturday so they make plans to catch the late show on Friday and since I don't have to work I agree to go with them too. 

3.  Tank, who is my fiance's brother has to work Saturday and has Green Bay Blizzard tickets for Friday night, asks about the 12:01am thursday night show so he can see it.    And seriously, who can pass up a midnight show.

The result-  I'm committed to seeing it three times in the first 48 hours of it's release.  I guess I can report if it has replay value or not.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: a pretty girl is like on July 16, 2008, 05:28:31 AM
We're gonna be all hack and see the midnight showing in our pyjamas.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: mrbasehart on July 16, 2008, 07:22:46 AM
Look at poor Orson Wells. He goes out with Transformers: The Movie. I mean, sure it's better than Street Fighter, but look at the man's past!

Agreed, but at least it was a voice-over.  He could hide his (admittedly huge) face behind it.  Wasn't his voice also electronically treated? It didn't sound much like Welles when I saw the film. 

Raul Julia called for him not only to be onscreen a lot, but to also be dressed like this:

(http://darkdiamond.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/raul-julia-bison.jpg)

I mean, look at how pissed off he looks! I bet he's thinking "Man, I should have taken that Overdrawn at the Memory Banks sequel".  :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: mrbasehart on July 16, 2008, 07:35:30 AM
This is interesting:

Quote
Director Terry Gilliam has slammed the promotional campaign for the new Batman movie - insisting movie bosses are using Heath Ledger's tragic death to generate publicity for the movie.

The actor died of an accidental overdose of prescription drugs in January shortly after shooting his final film - The Imaginarium of Dr Parnassus - under the direction of Gilliam.

And the moviemaker fears that the producers of Ledger's second to last picture, The Dark Knight, are shamelessly capitalising on rumours that the late star will be awarded a posthumous Oscar for his role as evil villain The Joker.

He says, "That's what Warner Brothers are saying, but they'll do anything to publicise their film. That's just what they do and you can't get upset because it's bulls**t.

"They're like a great white shark which devours whatever it can."

I'm not sure I agree with Terry here, it may be a little inappropriate to promote Ledger the way they've done since his death, but even if he was still alive, I believe The Joker would've been the major focus of the promotional campaign. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thrashalla on July 16, 2008, 07:47:17 AM
I fully agree that the marketing campaign has been over the top and tasteless...but for sheer volume and length of time, not for the Ledger thing. I remember promotions started before ComicCon last year, and people were pretty much tripping over themselves to get any snippet they could. The first one was good and all (not just saying that...I saw it 2 times in theaters and owned 2 different version at one point!), but come on. This whole "OMFG BATMAN!!!" attitude has kind of blindsided me as I have no clue where it came from nor the reason for it (well, I know the reason for it, but I fail to comprehend the validity that reason :P ) This is the first I've heard of the Oscar thing as well, and unless he knocks the performance out of the park I think it's pretty ridiculous...but then again, so are the Oscars so I guess it would be a perfect match.

...maybe I'll go see HellBoy 2 again this weekend while the roomies are at the iMax of this one.  ;D

Edit: I should probably say that i really don't have anything against this movie and actually do want to see it, just as soon as that nasty year and a half long hype taste in my mouth goes away a wee bit.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 16, 2008, 08:34:54 AM
Look at poor Orson Wells. He goes out with Transformers: The Movie. I mean, sure it's better than Street Fighter, but look at the man's past!

Wells is my favorite actor of all time so every time I see that movie I die a little more inside.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Raven on July 16, 2008, 02:31:44 PM
This is interesting:

Quote
Director Terry Gilliam has slammed the promotional campaign for the new Batman movie - insisting movie bosses are using Heath Ledger's tragic death to generate publicity for the movie.

The actor died of an accidental overdose of prescription drugs in January shortly after shooting his final film - The Imaginarium of Dr Parnassus - under the direction of Gilliam.

And the moviemaker fears that the producers of Ledger's second to last picture, The Dark Knight, are shamelessly capitalising on rumours that the late star will be awarded a posthumous Oscar for his role as evil villain The Joker.

He says, "That's what Warner Brothers are saying, but they'll do anything to publicise their film. That's just what they do and you can't get upset because it's bulls**t.

"They're like a great white shark which devours whatever it can."

I'm not sure I agree with Terry here, it may be a little inappropriate to promote Ledger the way they've done since his death, but even if he was still alive, I believe The Joker would've been the major focus of the promotional campaign. 

I don't think it's the production companies fault that Rolling Stone threw the word Oscar out there.  If anyone seriously thinks he'll even be nominated, they have another thing coming.  Any movie featuring Batman will never have anything to do with the Oscars outside of the technical awards.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 16, 2008, 02:34:41 PM
I'm starting to have my doubts about the success of this movie, I mean it is going up against Mamma Mia!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on July 16, 2008, 03:45:26 PM
I'm starting to have my doubts about the success of this movie, I mean it is going up against Mamma Mia!

And the music of ABBA is scarier than ANY possible portrayal of a homicidal clown.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 16, 2008, 04:04:11 PM
I'm starting to have my doubts about the success of this movie, I mean it is going up against Mamma Mia!

And the music of ABBA is scarier than ANY possible portrayal of a homicidal clown.

Precisely.  If for some reason my girlfriend thinks she's going to be able to drag me to that abortion of cinema, I'm going to bring a cyanide pill for myself.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: wurwolf on July 16, 2008, 04:48:37 PM
You know, if I put it just that way, Ann might go for that ;)

Now you know why I fell for my husband. He's quite the charmer, isn' t he?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on July 17, 2008, 06:29:17 AM

Any movie featuring Batman will never have anything to do with the Oscars outside of the technical awards.


To me, Ledger getting nominated for this isn't as much of a stretch as Depp getting nominated for Pirates.  That was pretty silly if you ask me.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: TheUnabeefer on July 17, 2008, 01:26:12 PM
To me, there will NEVER be a Joker better than Cesar Romero.  :angry:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 17, 2008, 01:28:42 PM
KEVIN MICHAEL RICHARDSON IS THE AWESOMEST JOKER!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 17, 2008, 01:57:04 PM
MICHAEL RICHARDS IS THE AWESOMEST JOKER!!!!!!!!!

I fixed it for you.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 17, 2008, 02:15:51 PM
Who's Michael Richards?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thrashalla on July 17, 2008, 02:20:28 PM
Who's Michael Richards?

(http://www.overtimecomedy.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/kramer.jpg)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 17, 2008, 02:22:57 PM
Who's Michael Richards?

(http://www.findardor.com/articles/kramer/images/kramer.jpg)

oh
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Raven on July 17, 2008, 02:47:43 PM
Anybody else checking their watches every ten minutes or so?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Fortis on July 17, 2008, 02:54:24 PM
Sadly...yes...sigh...8 more hours
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 17, 2008, 02:56:42 PM
Oh I feel so sorry for you, okay

I have to wait till Saturday, okay

which means I'm probably going to watch Mamma Mia! to pass the time, okay

which is not okay, okay
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Fortis on July 17, 2008, 02:59:23 PM
Point taken...I'll count myself lucky.



...I mean I can enjoy abba as much as the next guy...but gah
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 17, 2008, 03:01:16 PM
yeah, I have this weird fascination with actors singing, okay
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Fortis on July 17, 2008, 03:05:47 PM
I think the only thing that movie will do is reaffirm my stance on Pierce Brosnan, I didn't like him as a James Bond..I always suspected he was a nancy...and now we have the proof.


I think its funny when actors sing too
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Hebs on July 17, 2008, 04:02:40 PM
OH MY GOD YOU GUYS


I JUST CAME BACK FROM DARK KNIGHT


There is this unbelieveable cafe scene...

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 17, 2008, 06:04:12 PM
OH MY GOD YOU GUYS


I JUST CAME BACK FROM DARK KNIGHT


There is this unbelieveable cafe scene...

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on July 17, 2008, 06:17:28 PM
Alright, after a lot of plans falling through I said screw it and bought my ticket for tomorrow, going on my own at 5pm.  I'll figure out a way to get to an IMAX showing with more friends later.  For now it's just a matter of how much of the Joker costume to wear.  I'd go all out, but my costume doesn't match up with the movie at all, so I'm thinking I'll just wear the suit sans-makeup/wig/prostetics
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on July 17, 2008, 07:22:16 PM
Due to travel issues, I won't be seeing it until the matinee showing on Saturday. So since some people have already seen it, I don't think I'd better read this thread (or about 37% of the rest of the internet) until then, just to be on the safe side.

I want to enjoy it unspoiled. :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on July 17, 2008, 07:27:39 PM
So a variant on Pretty's line did indeed do the trick or at least make it significantly more likely that we'll be seeing this on IMAX on Saturday. Though again I'll be surprised if i really get much out of the IMAX.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 17, 2008, 07:39:02 PM
Got my tickets for a 10pm Imax show tomorrow night with some friends.  Boozin' it up before and afterwards of course.  Can't fucking wait.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 17, 2008, 07:55:47 PM
Due to travel issues, I won't be seeing it until the matinee showing on Saturday. So since some people have already seen it, I don't think I'd better read this thread (or about 37% of the rest of the internet) until then, just to be on the safe side.

I want to enjoy it unspoiled. :)


who's already seen it, okay?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Hebs on July 17, 2008, 08:25:10 PM
OH MY GOD YOU GUYS


I JUST CAME BACK FROM DARK KNIGHT


There is this unbelieveable cafe scene...

Bruce decides he's going to give it all up and turns to the dark side!  He gets a pointy hair cut, dresses like Gerard from My Chemical Romance and does a crazy dance in front of Mary Jane!


I'm sorry, I'm sorry - I'm kidding of course.  We're seeing it tomorrow.
does he ask her if she can "dig on this", okay?



Bahaha ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: mearnest on July 18, 2008, 12:50:00 AM
Friggin sweet.  Ledger turned in an amazing performance.  I think I'll have to sleep on it before I can properly weigh in.  But for now I'll just say:
Damn. :clap:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: doggans on July 18, 2008, 01:01:53 AM
There's nothing I can say about this movie that hasn't already been said (or won't soon be said) by people more eloquent than myself. So I'll just say, fantastic. I was worried that the hype might kill it, but it certainly met and exceeded my (already high) expectations.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: mearnest on July 18, 2008, 01:15:59 AM
<spoiler>
I would just like to say as a guy who's spent a little time in jail (a week).  Big, scary inmates are not about self-sacrifice.  They'll pretty much shiv you just to get to the phone.  It was kind of heart warming in the movie but just not very realistic.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Compound on July 18, 2008, 01:55:57 AM
Mountain Time Zone checking in.

Wow. Very nicely done.

More when I regain conciousness.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Compound on July 18, 2008, 02:05:21 AM
And before I forget:

The Watchman trailer was in front of the film.  It looks damn impressive. I noted that a couple of scenes that I thought would never be in the film seem to be in there. I'm a lot more enthusiastic about it now.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Raven on July 18, 2008, 02:13:03 AM
I can honestly say that I'd be hard pressed to pick a favorite scene.  As a whole I loved Ledger's dialogue.  The intro to his character was classic.  I'll try to keep it spoiler free.  Loved his magic trick. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: mearnest on July 18, 2008, 02:33:19 AM
Yeah, his 'magic trick' was pretty classic.  True Joker.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: TheUnabeefer on July 18, 2008, 03:24:12 AM
Now THAT is the Batman movie I have been waiting to see for 20 years. (since I was 8)   :clap:

I think the whole thing still needs to settle in a bit, so I am going to sleep...  but I am not sure if that movie is for the general public... it's like having Blue Velvet be mainstream.

I approve.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: a pretty girl is like on July 18, 2008, 07:14:59 AM
I would tell SpiderMan 2 to move over because someone else deserves that top spot of the comic book movie but this isn't quite a comic book movie.  Like Seven, Dog Day Afternoon, Unforgiven, Silence of the Lambs, this is an elevation of the genre.  The Dark Knight works with and within all the usual genre tropes but it never belongs to  them.  I'm sorry to say it, as much as I enjoyed Iron Man, the first two X-Men movies and SpiderMan movies, these are kids'movies now.  The Dark Knight simply is more. 

And this is all due to Heath Ledger.   He isn't a villain.  To call him a comic book villain would just diminish his accomplishment.   Watching him, you understand why people chase tornadoes.   Nervous laughter has never been more enjoyable.

The only quibble I have right now is the big action finale becomes too much of a blur at times but the payoff literally turns Batman's world and the genre upside down.   

Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Dim of the Yard on July 18, 2008, 07:27:35 AM
If I'm going to be honest, I dug Harvey Dent a lot more than the Joker, but everybody gave an absolutely stellar performance.  It was an absolutely fantastic movie, and I would be thrilled to see it again.  I especially want to see it because I got to the theater late and ended up in the front-front rows and probably missed half of the action.

Better still, I saw the movie in a great crowd.  They laughed and cheered in all the right places, applauded the Joker's scenes, audibly cringed in the right places, and made the movie a hell of a lot of fun.  A couple of them even dressed up as the Joker.  And somebody left behind a comic book in the cup holder of one of the seats.  It's all mine now.

So... yeah, I had fun.  Best girl's night out ever.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: anais.jude on July 18, 2008, 09:27:33 AM
A-freaking-mazing!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Courtney on July 18, 2008, 09:43:33 AM
One bit of sadness I have when it comes to living in Chicago: Many nerds in large quantities.  I got my tickets almost a month ago, the day or so after they came out, and I still could only get into the 9am Saturday (tomorrow) showing waayyy in the back of the theater.  My boyfriend drove out to the suburbs last night for the midnight showing and left me the single most terrifying voicemail I've ever received using the single greatest Heath Joker impression I've ever heard anyone do.  Lovely/uberscary thing to wake up to.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 18, 2008, 09:47:19 AM
I can never ever ever read this thread till Sunday, okay
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Ortega on July 18, 2008, 09:52:00 AM
I'm going to wait until Tuesday to see it, and go see the 1:00pm matinee to avoid all the crowds. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Tripe on July 18, 2008, 09:56:14 AM
Hey Pat Leahy chalks up another one. (http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/07/batmanloving_senator_in_dark_k.html). :)

Oh and 10 am on Sunday for the IMAX, Pat's liver spots will look tremendous.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Compound on July 18, 2008, 10:21:52 AM
I can never ever ever read this thread till Sunday, okay

But then you won't find out that

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 18, 2008, 10:23:40 AM
I'm gonna go at 3:15 today

Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 18, 2008, 10:25:53 AM
I can never ever ever read this thread till Sunday, okay

But then you won't find out that


...the Joker is made of chocolate. (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/04/29/)


Spoiler (click to show/hide)
, okay

Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: wurwolf on July 18, 2008, 10:26:26 AM
Onil (Pretty) and the kids and I went to the midnight show last night and it was a party. The theater had a DJ there and there were news cameras and everything. We went in our pajamas and it was fully awesome.

The movie... gosh, I don't even know if I can really put into words how epic it was. I know it's in vogue to talk about how great Heath Ledger was as the Joker in this because he's dead, but honestly.... he really and truly did an amazing job. This was the darkest Joker I'd ever seen. He is a serial killer in this movie. To say that he was cold-hearted implies that he has a heart -- heartless would be a much better term.

I won't spoil anything, but I will say the first big scene where the Joker introduces himself -- unbelievable. I had been half holding my breath through the entire thing without realizing it. When the Joker left the room and the scene ended, Onil and I just looked at each other and said, "Holy shit." Also, the magic trick made the entire theater gasp.

Christian Bale's Batman was great, and he really put a lot of effort into his Bruce Wayne. Very nicely played on Bale's part, but he was overshadowed by Heath Ledger. The Joker stole the show.

Like so many other people here, I left the movie with a sense of being unsettled. I couldn't give a true assessment of what I thought, and I felt that I needed to go home and digest it. Onil said, and I agree, that this was more than a mere comic book movie. It simultaneously elevated the genre by association, yet left the genre behind. We're planning to see it again this weekend.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Dim of the Yard on July 18, 2008, 11:29:04 AM
Also, the magic trick made the entire theater gasp.

Those are the kind of moments where the audience is sometimes more entertaining than the movie, itself.  The girls in front of me jumped up really high at that point.  It was great!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Steve-O on July 18, 2008, 02:47:42 PM
Word of the next sequel has already leaked out:

http://www.datelinehollywood.com/dateline_hollywood/2008/07/dark-knight-seq.html
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Compound on July 18, 2008, 02:54:19 PM
D'oh! Something that I missed:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BBQ Platypus on July 18, 2008, 02:59:05 PM
I went to a midnight screening last night.  The theater was absolutely PACKED.  The movie was showing in nine theaters - SEVEN of those showings were sold out by the time I ordered my tickets, and the one I ended up going to was about 80-90% full.  So I knew the fanboys were going to be out in force (the blue Mustang with the "JEDI" vanity plate that I saw in the parking lot was my first clue).  But honest to God, entering the lobby was like walking into a goddamn comic book convention.  It seemed like half the people there were wearing costumes.  I almost felt like a jackass for not wearing clown makeup...almost.

Still, I felt like a bit of a fanboy myself.  I'd been waiting to see this movie for over a year.  The rational part of me kept saying "Now, now - curb your enthusiasm just a LITTLE bit, BBQ. You won't be disappointed and you'll enjoy it more if you do."  But it was to no avail - deep down, I knew that this was going to be the greatest thing to happen to movies since they added sound.  I sat down in the theater a good 45 minutes before midnight, fully ready for this movie to make me its bitch.

And boy, did it ever.  I think I can safely say without any hint of exaggeration that I want to bear this movie's child.  All the buildup, all the hype - it was all justified.  Anyone who thinks that the Oscar buzz surrounding Heath Ledger is just shameless hype and exploitation of his tragic death can prepare to eat their words.  Because they were NOT FUCKING LYING.  Dear God, Heath Ledger was spectacular.  He was captivating from the moment he was introduced - but to me, the scene where
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
was the part where he really seemed to "arrive."  I never really paid much attention to his career before, but after watching him in this movie, I already miss the hell out of him.  I have no idea how they're going to replace him (if that is what they intend to do).

Make no mistake - the Joker as he appears in TDK is the true, definitive version of the character.  THIS is who the Joker really is - I just didn't know it until last night.  From now on, when people think of the Joker, they will think of Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight.  All other portrayals of him - whether it be Jack Nicholson in the original Batman, Cesar Romero in the TV series, or Mark Hammill in TAS (which up to this point had been my favorite) - simply pale by comparison.  The reason is simple - the others seemed to stay within predictable boundaries (although to be fair, the limits on content in Saturday Morning cartoons came into play in Hammill's case).  This Joker doesn't play by any rules - he has no boundaries or qualms whatsoever.  That's what makes him so scary.

Of course, there's much more to this movie than just his amazing performance.  The ensemble cast turns in great performances all around (seriously, why the hell hasn't Christian Bale even been NOMINATED for an Oscar yet?), and Christopher Nolan's direction is superb.  And the storyline is superbly dramatic, compelling, and intense, managing to be both uplifting and profoundly tragic at the same time.  I really liked the way the film kept building momentum as the story progressed, getting better and better with every minute.  And it has a lot to say as well (but I don't want to spoil anything by revealing any of the themes to you - the movie does it way better than I could). 
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
  Really, together with Batman Begins, it just makes other superhero movies look downright silly by comparison.

I have but two complaints about my experience.  First, there were about elevnty jillion trailers in front of the movie.  While I understand why the various studios would want this kind of advertising space (since damn near everybody in the country is going to see this movie), I found it pretty irritating that I had to sit through 20 minutes of trailers (and - ugh - straight-up advertisements).  On the plus side, most of them were for movies I look forward to seeing (the new Bond movie, Watchmen, and Terminator 4, which I refuse to refer to by the godawful title they've saddled it with).

Second, the film burned out with about an hour left to go (right when
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
).  Fortunately, they had it up and running in about five minutes, and everyone in the theater got a free pass for a movie of their choice for their troubles.

All in all, it was an awesome experience.  If you haven't seen it, WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU WAITING FOR!?  Stop what you're doing and SEE IT NOW!!!  See it TWICE!!!  See it FIVE TIMES!!!!!!


DISCLAIMER:  Despite the orgasmic levels of praise I have lavished upon this movie, I would still recommend you to follow my stupid, boring old brain's advice if at all possible.  Try not to get TOO worked up over it.  it's just a movie, not the second coming of Jesus Christ...even if it is pretty close.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Fortis on July 18, 2008, 03:45:16 PM
Well...its time to add my take on this movie..........I love villains, I love deep and complex characters. Its what makes me like some movies other people don't like. Lady in the water for instance, I like it becuase of its characters.

But....they accomplished the impossible here. You see, there are special criteria for a villain to be good and interesting. Here are a few of the options...

misunderstood - used way too much, but can make for some good villains (Voldemort)

able to be redeemed - the villains that in spite of their evil...can still make the right choice (Darth Vader)

Godlike power - These sorts of villains usually don't have a view point and we don't usually see them, but we know how powerful they can be (Sauron)

Downright Evil - Have such hate and rage that they go after the hero relentlessly...these are usually pretty 2D characters (Ganon)


And then...we have the villain that Joker is. This kind of villain is never done...because its very hard to write a villain like the Joker. It is very hard to write a villain that has NO motivation, none whatsoever. Usually these villains are boring, because everyone needs to usually have the motivation. Unless the audience hates the villain, which makes things interesting, but again, this doesn't work if we hate the villain so much we can't stand to see them on screen.

But they accomplished every writers dream of the perfect villain. A force of nature, one that has no rules, no motivation, one that you hate so much, but is so interesting you crave to see more of it. A villain that makes a hero almost become a villain himself to defeat him.

Guys...I've been trying to write a villain like this in one of my books...and its extremely hard, I mean, incredibly hard. I don't think I have the skill to do it, but I was in awe at what the Nolan brothers were able to write, and what Heath Ledger was able to portray. I was giddy as a school boy to see the villain I've always wanted to create, on screen...(though after watching this...I realized that my villain just isn't as interesting as the Joker...oh well. I'll think of something)


Also, everybody's performances were great, especially Christian Bale and Heath Ledger. They were simply incredible. Gary Oldman and Micheal Caine are always fun to watch, and the soundtrack was also great. I love James Newton Howard, and even though I don't really like Hanz Zimmer...his contribution mixed well with James Newton Howards.

All in all, I give this movie a ten out of ten, for making a writer almost piss his pants in glee.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Hebs on July 18, 2008, 06:26:27 PM
Okay:  *cracks knuckles*  a few things.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BBQ Platypus on July 18, 2008, 06:40:27 PM
Wow...The Dark Knight is #3 on the IMDB Top 250 right now!

http://www.imdb.com/chart/top (http://www.imdb.com/chart/top)

Not that I take the IMDB rankings seriously (anyone who does is an idiot), but it's nice to know that people are seeing the movie and liking it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: gbeenie on July 18, 2008, 06:47:25 PM
BTW, if your (regular theatrical; I don't know about IMAX) viewing of The Dark Knight is not preceded by a trailer for Watchmen, you should complain to the manager. There are few things sadder than a projectionist who doesn't know anything about movies.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on July 18, 2008, 07:09:21 PM
I'll probably say more later, much much more, but I'm only stopping by at home and I'll likely be out late.  Occasions to wear a bright purple suit are rare and I plan to take advantage.

I will have to say this though.

THAT!  THAT is the Joker!  Pure and simple, I'm not just gushing to be part of the crowd or saying it because he's dead and it's in vogue to praise him, Heath was the perfect Joker for this film!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Nergol on July 18, 2008, 08:30:28 PM
Strangely, I think a poster on 4chan nailed the Nolan/Ledger Joker when he said that the Joker "just did it for the lulz".

This Joker had almost the personality of an internet troll. Internet trolls have that weird thing going on where they do what they do seemingly half out of getting a charge from upsetting people and half out of sheer boredom. The Joker had no greed, and didn't even seem to derive pleasure from killing as much as he didn't care if people got killed in the course of his amusing himself and running little social experiments just out of bemused interest in seeing what happened. Like a kid who pulls the wings off a butterfly not particularly to be cruel to the butterfly, but just to see what the butterfly will do without them.

Comparing the Burton/Nicholson Joker and the Nolan/Ledger joker is simply impossible - apples and oranges. Both were good, and completely different. Maybe this is a case in which there is no wrong answer, but both answers can be right in their own way.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on July 18, 2008, 08:57:07 PM
Strangely, I think a poster on 4chan nailed the Nolan/Ledger Joker when he said that the Joker "just did it for the lulz".

This Joker had almost the personality of an internet troll. Internet trolls have that weird thing going on where they do what they do seemingly half out of getting a charge from upsetting people and half out of sheer boredom. The Joker had no greed, and didn't even seem to derive pleasure from killing as much as he didn't care if people got killed in the course of his amusing himself and running little social experiments just out of bemused interest in seeing what happened. Like a kid who pulls the wings off a butterfly not particularly to be cruel to the butterfly, but just to see what the butterfly will do without them.

Comparing the Burton/Nicholson Joker and the Nolan/Ledger joker is simply impossible - apples and oranges. Both were good, and completely different. Maybe this is a case in which there is no wrong answer, but both answers can be right in their own way.

Well put.  That's why I was trying to be clear saying "perfect Joker for this flim"

I also think this version, just in mentality, better reflects the Joker of the comics.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: a pretty girl is like on July 18, 2008, 09:28:50 PM
IReally, together with Batman Begins, it just makes other superhero movies look downright silly by comparison.


I agree with pretty much all your points and share your jacked up beyond belief enthusiasm but this one sorta.  As good as Batman Begins is, The Dark Knight leaves it behind along with all the other superhero movies.  Batman Begins is still loaded with that cumbersome origin story and a too eloquent villain with a convoluted master plan.  The Dark Knight isn't as burdened and is free to establish new rules to play by.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BBQ Platypus on July 18, 2008, 10:20:42 PM
IReally, together with Batman Begins, it just makes other superhero movies look downright silly by comparison.


I agree with pretty much all your points and share your jacked up beyond belief enthusiasm but this one sorta.  As good as Batman Begins is, The Dark Knight leaves it behind along with all the other superhero movies.  Batman Begins is still loaded with that cumbersome origin story and a too eloquent villain with a convoluted master plan.  The Dark Knight isn't as burdened and is free to establish new rules to play by.

You know what...I actually kind of agree with you there.  As great as Begins was, TDK was a more mature film.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on July 18, 2008, 10:26:55 PM
IReally, together with Batman Begins, it just makes other superhero movies look downright silly by comparison.


I agree with pretty much all your points and share your jacked up beyond belief enthusiasm but this one sorta.  As good as Batman Begins is, The Dark Knight leaves it behind along with all the other superhero movies.  Batman Begins is still loaded with that cumbersome origin story and a too eloquent villain with a convoluted master plan.  The Dark Knight isn't as burdened and is free to establish new rules to play by.

You know what...I actually kind of agree with you there.  As great as Begins was, TDK was a more mature film.

I'll throw in with that.  It was kind of like how I liked X2 better than X-Men 1, they got through all the neccessary origin stuff with the first one and were left to play the game they wanted with the second.  The commentary for part two even referred to the first movie as a giant trailer for the sequel.

Though this takes it to another level.  With both Batman Begins and Dark Knight I was very conscious of how long they were while I was watching.  That's normally not a good sign, but in their cases it worked.  I knew they were long, but I liked it, you could feel a sense of length because they both built up well to their climax.  Dark Knight did it better though.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 18, 2008, 10:58:28 PM
I really really wanted to like this movie. However when it came down to it, Bale's Batman voice always made me laugh, and the script was an epic speech every other moment and the moments that weren't speech, just awkward jokes. Once again female love interest was unnecessary, unwarranted, and unhelpful. Then you get into Joker just being a prick with makeup, and Dent being hacked into gimmick fodder for Batman instead of a standalone villain. I don't know, at least Hell Boy two wasn't meant to be taken seriously.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BBQ Platypus on July 18, 2008, 11:18:12 PM
I really really wanted to like this movie. However when it came down to it, Bale's Batman voice always made me laugh, and the script was an epic speech every other moment and the moments that weren't speech, just awkward jokes. Once again female love interest was unnecessary, unwarranted, and unhelpful. Then you get into Joker just being a prick with makeup, and Dent being hacked into gimmick fodder for Batman instead of a standalone villain. I don't know, at least Hell Boy two wasn't meant to be taken seriously.

I reply to your post...with a resounding "meh."  There has never been a movie that absolutely EVERYBODY loves.  Just understand that you're in the minority here.  And I personally think the problem is you weren't really "on board" with the movie - didn't "get it," if you will (DISCLAIMER:  "Not getting" a movie DOES NOT mean that you're stupid, nor does it reflect poorly upon you in any way).  Just understand that to say that you're in the minority here would be a gross understatement.

I could argue with you (among other things, I'd say that Harvey Dent's character was most certainly NOT a gimmick, but an integral part of the plot who was central to one of the film's most important themes, and that the Joker is a PSYCHOPATH with makeup and no mere prick).  But, like all arguments on the Internet, it would be about as fruitful as pissing in the wind.  Hats off to you, good sir, for being brave enough to state your opinion in a thread full of drooling, impressed fanboys.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 18, 2008, 11:23:44 PM
Everyone seemed to love Juno before and after it came out, now no one talks about it, it seems. I'm sure this movie will be talked about a good while, I'm sure Heath Ledger will be up for an oscar and get it. I'm sure you all will say huzzah and finally the oscar gets it right and so forth. Doesn't mean any of that is right, just means I'm glad I am me, and you are you, and that ten years from now when someone else "reinvents" Batman. I still will be glad I am me, and you will be whoever you are. :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BBQ Platypus on July 18, 2008, 11:40:53 PM
Well...that was quite a civilized exchange.  And now for something completely different!

"Dark Knight" earns over $60 million (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117989204.html?categoryid=13&cs=1)

Geez....I knew this movie was going to make a shitton of money, but I wasn't expecting it to break Spider-Man 3's record.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 19, 2008, 12:53:38 AM
BEST. JOKER. EVER.

I don't want to hear about anybody else playing him in the past.  This is what The Joker was always supposed to be.  Completely psychotic and unpredictable. I take back all the "Brokeback Mountain" jokes I've made about Heath Ledger in the past, he's a far better actor then I thought he was capable of being from what I've seen him in before.  And he was absolutely BRILLIANT in this film.  :clap:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 19, 2008, 01:10:55 AM
 ::)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 19, 2008, 04:04:23 AM
Well...that was quite a civilized exchange.  And now for something completely different!

"Dark Knight" earns over $60 million (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117989204.html?categoryid=13&cs=1)

Geez....I knew this movie was going to make a shitton of money, but I wasn't expecting it to break Spider-Man 3's record.

and it has no where to go but up, okay



Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Cosmic Muse on July 19, 2008, 06:20:46 AM
BEST. JOKER. EVER.

I have to agree with you here. It's just too bad that Heath Ledger left this world so prematurely before he really had the chance to shine in other roles. His Joker is something to behold indeed.

Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 19, 2008, 07:04:38 AM
I was the second person in line to see it at the first show yesterday and I got the best season in the house.

Did it live up to the hype? Yes.

Is Ledger the best Joker ever? No.

Ledger played the Joker as typical insane street thug that you could find in any other crime movie.  He still did a good job but it just didn't feel like I was watching The Joker.  The things he did were Joker type stuff but the thing that makes the Joker scary to me is that the Joker thinks the things he does are jokes and he laughs all the way to the bank I only heard a couple of laughs and his smile isn't really a smile.  Don't get me wrong it was very good work on Ledger's part but Nichlson in 1989 felt more like The Joker to me.

If you ask me the person who should get the Oscer nods is guy who played Two Face/Harvey Dent he was perfect and really put Tommy Lee Jones in his place.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The intire cast does a great job it has great action and the ending leaves me thinking that the next Batman movie is going to be one of the biggest things ever.

This movie raises the bare for all superhero movies and it may even be better then the first Superman movie.

This movie is a classic that I will be going back to see again.

9.5/10.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: ScottotD on July 19, 2008, 07:37:03 AM
breaking my decision not to read this thread to point out Nicholson's Panto/Al Pacino version of the Joker was SO unbelievably shit it made Schwarzenegger's Mr. Freeze look like a muti-faceted and nuanced character study.

...carry on, I'm busy booking tickets to see Dark Knight again tomorrow.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Cosmic Muse on July 19, 2008, 07:41:39 AM
I was the second person in line to see it at the first show yesterday and I got the best season in the house.

Did it live up to the hype? Yes.

Is Ledger the best Joker ever? No.

Ledger played the Joker as typical insane street thug that you could find in any other crime movie.  He still did a good job but it just didn't feel like I was watching The Joker.  The things he did were Joker type stuff but the thing that makes the Joker scary to me is that the Joker thinks the things he does are jokes and he laughs all the way to the bank I only heard a couple of laughs and his smile isn't really a smile.  Don't get me wrong it was very good work on Ledger's part but Nichlson in 1989 felt more like The Joker to me.

If you ask me the person who should get the Oscer nods is guy who played Two Face/Harvey Dent he was perfect and really put Tommy Lee Jones in his place.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The intire cast does a great job it has great action and the ending leaves me thinking that the next Batman movie is going to be one of the biggest things ever.

This movie raises the bare for all superhero movies and it may even be better then the first Superman movie.

This movie is a classic that I will be going back to see again.

9.5/10.

You haven't read too many of the Joker's darker, earlier comic appearances have you? Heath's Joker is spot on to the original intent of who the Joker is, a deranged, thrill seeking murderer.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: ScottotD on July 19, 2008, 07:49:08 AM
Heath's Joker is up there with Alex from Clockwork Orange as one of the most amazing nutters on film.


Honestly, this movie should be nominated for best picture at the Oscars.  It won't because the voters are laughably close minded and self-important but if unwatchable rubbish like Little miss sunshine, Crash, Master and Commander, Gladiator, etc can get it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 19, 2008, 08:17:01 AM
I was the second person in line to see it at the first show yesterday and I got the best season in the house.

Did it live up to the hype? Yes.

Is Ledger the best Joker ever? No.

Ledger played the Joker as typical insane street thug that you could find in any other crime movie.  He still did a good job but it just didn't feel like I was watching The Joker.  The things he did were Joker type stuff but the thing that makes the Joker scary to me is that the Joker thinks the things he does are jokes and he laughs all the way to the bank I only heard a couple of laughs and his smile isn't really a smile.  Don't get me wrong it was very good work on Ledger's part but Nichlson in 1989 felt more like The Joker to me.

If you ask me the person who should get the Oscer nods is guy who played Two Face/Harvey Dent he was perfect and really put Tommy Lee Jones in his place.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The intire cast does a great job it has great action and the ending leaves me thinking that the next Batman movie is going to be one of the biggest things ever.

This movie raises the bare for all superhero movies and it may even be better then the first Superman movie.

This movie is a classic that I will be going back to see again.

9.5/10.

You haven't read too many of the Joker's darker, earlier comic appearances have you? Heath's Joker is spot on to the original intent of who the Joker is, a deranged, thrill seeking murderer.

Yes I have but again he was smiling and Laghing all the way.

Don't get me wrong ledger was amazing and everything the Joker did was something the Joker would do but The Joker is scary because he laughs while doing it and he has a smile on his lips.  A guy with a few scares and makeup on his face just doesn't look like the Joker to me.

Still this is the best movie of the summer and maybe of the year.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 19, 2008, 10:16:23 AM
I was the second person in line to see it at the first show yesterday and I got the best season in the house.

Did it live up to the hype? Yes.

Is Ledger the best Joker ever? No.

Ledger played the Joker as typical insane street thug that you could find in any other crime movie.  He still did a good job but it just didn't feel like I was watching The Joker.  The things he did were Joker type stuff but the thing that makes the Joker scary to me is that the Joker thinks the things he does are jokes and he laughs all the way to the bank I only heard a couple of laughs and his smile isn't really a smile.  Don't get me wrong it was very good work on Ledger's part but Nichlson in 1989 felt more like The Joker to me.

If you ask me the person who should get the Oscer nods is guy who played Two Face/Harvey Dent he was perfect and really put Tommy Lee Jones in his place.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The intire cast does a great job it has great action and the ending leaves me thinking that the next Batman movie is going to be one of the biggest things ever.

This movie raises the bare for all superhero movies and it may even be better then the first Superman movie.

This movie is a classic that I will be going back to see again.

9.5/10.

You haven't read too many of the Joker's darker, earlier comic appearances have you? Heath's Joker is spot on to the original intent of who the Joker is, a deranged, thrill seeking murderer.

Yes I have but again he was smiling and Laghing all the way.

Don't get me wrong ledger was amazing and everything the Joker did was something the Joker would do but The Joker is scary because he laughs while doing it and he has a smile on his lips.  A guy with a few scares and makeup on his face just doesn't look like the Joker to me.

Still this is the best movie of the summer and maybe of the year.

You weren't paying attention then.  He laughed PLENTY of times (at the very end, is he laughing because he wants to die, or because he knows Batman won't let him?).  And when he wasn't he had that eclectic tone to his voice which made it sound like he was joking and it was incredibly creepy.

As far as his "smile" goes, The Joker's past is all over the place in the series. Originally, he just shows up with no back-story.  Eventually somebody wrote in the chemical accident which is how Jack's Joker came to be.  Jack was a decent Joker but watching it again now, it's corny as fuck and he's not intimidating at all in comparison.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Cosmic Muse on July 19, 2008, 10:59:36 AM
Yes I have but again he was smiling and Laghing all the way.

Don't get me wrong ledger was amazing and everything the Joker did was something the Joker would do but The Joker is scary because he laughs while doing it and he has a smile on his lips.  A guy with a few scares and makeup on his face just doesn't look like the Joker to me.

Still this is the best movie of the summer and maybe of the year.

You see, this is just the kind of naivety the Joker would prey on. You don't think he's all that scary and intimidating until it's too late. Remember Joker's magic trick?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 19, 2008, 11:01:17 AM
I'm just going to stop reading this thread now. Considering people actually believe Ledger did the best Joker, considering people are saying best movie of the year with them knowing they've only seen american films, and considering the fact people actually think oscar.  :clap: I'm out.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Nick on July 19, 2008, 11:02:16 AM
Goodbye. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 19, 2008, 11:08:04 AM
Yes I have but again he was smiling and Laghing all the way.

Don't get me wrong ledger was amazing and everything the Joker did was something the Joker would do but The Joker is scary because he laughs while doing it and he has a smile on his lips.  A guy with a few scares and makeup on his face just doesn't look like the Joker to me.

Still this is the best movie of the summer and maybe of the year.

You see, this is just the kind of naivety the Joker would prey on. You don't think he's all that scary and intimidating until it's too late. Remember Joker's magic trick?

The magic trick had people in the Imax theater I went to standing up and cheering, I was one of them.  That was classic Joker material.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Cosmic Muse on July 19, 2008, 11:25:16 AM
I'm just going to stop reading this thread now. Considering people actually believe Ledger did the best Joker, considering people are saying best movie of the year with them knowing they've only seen american films, and considering the fact people actually think oscar.  :clap: I'm out.

And a good riddance to you too sir. Considering I live here in the United States of America, American films are what they show in my theater you know.

The magic trick had people in the Imax theater I went to standing up and cheering, I was one of them.  That was classic Joker material.

I think the best thing about it was how the gangstas were acting all tough calling Joker a freak, clown, etc. etc. and overall not taking him seriously at all. That's when they made they're critical mistake, assume the twitchy, awkward looking guy in clown makeup was not a threat. The magic trick showed just how unpredictable The Joker really is.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Courtney on July 19, 2008, 11:28:10 AM
I'm just going to stop reading this thread now. Considering people actually believe Ledger did the best Joker, considering people are saying best movie of the year with them knowing they've only seen american films, and considering the fact people actually think oscar.  :clap: I'm out.

I'm really stoked for you psychic abilities you must have to know we've all only seen American movies.  What a burden that must be on your brain to be so much smarter than everyone else all the time.  Rough.

Just got back from the 9am IMAX and it was everything I hoped and more.  As the day edged closer I got worried that all the hype and buzz would be wrong, that it was just essentially capitalizing on the tragic death of a talented human being (which to some extent it was).  But it lived up to everything I heard.  This movie was amazing.  It was the film the genre so simply defined as "comic book movies" needed.  Dark, incredibly smart, thought-provoking, funny, sad, scary, everything.  Love love loved it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Compound on July 19, 2008, 11:44:55 AM
Well, let me try the polite route.

What films would you consider to be the best films released so far this year?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Relaxing Dragon on July 19, 2008, 11:58:05 AM
It's not to me, but I'd say In Bruges (love that one).

Moving along, I loved this movie. I'm not much of a Batman fan, but this one still sucked me in. And I know everyone's said it a billion and a half times (give or take), it's all about the Joker here. Not the craziest or creepiest character I've ever seen, but probably the most fun one (and still quite evil). While I do agree about what Doctor Who said, about how Ledger wasn't quite 'true' Joker enough, but he took it in a direction that worked. It's not so much about the clown tricks (though bless the pencil trick, that was great), the constant laughter, or even actually smiling all the time. It's the general insanity, one that isn't visible right away, but sorta creeps up on you. Ledger went that way, and pulled it off beautifully. I'm not sure if he should win an Oscar for it, but there would be no complaint for me if he was nominated.

As for the rest of the film, it was good. Probably could've used some cutting to make it shorter (the Hong Kong sequence, for instance, wasn't really that necessary), but the pacing made it all seem better. Great movie, definitely one of the better ones this year.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on July 19, 2008, 12:46:06 PM
I really think that the main reason Heath didn't seem Joker-like to some people was just about the face and not about the performance.  Once you really examine how he sounds, what he says, what he does he had the mentality of the Joker perfectly.  Everything he said that described himself (even when giving contradictory backstories) was pure Joker.  Nolan made the decision to make the Joker a man with horrible scars that covers it up with makeup because that makes more sense in the "hyperreality" he uses for this series than a man who is forced to smile after being dumped in a chemical bath.  For this movie, I think they made every decision about the Joker right.

And Two Face was just perfect...end of story.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BBQ Platypus on July 19, 2008, 01:22:26 PM
I think it'll be a couple days yet before we start to see a slightly larger (but still fairly small) number of irate reviews from contrarians who are allergic to popularity of any kind.  (I'm not saying that all the people who say they don't like TDK fall into this category, I'm saying that they're out there).  I can see the IMDB forum posts now:

Quote
ZOMFG THE DARK NIHGT IS TEH WORST MOVIE EVAR!!!  if you havent seen it yet DONT BELIEVE THE HYPE!  anyone who says they like this movie are just sheeple who do whatevr they r told. just like the ppl who say the govermint didnt plan 911 its just like taht one storyi where the emperer is nekkid an stuf.  their just goin to c it cuz of that FAGGOT DRUG ADDICT BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN GUY is in it!

THIS MOVIE WAS BORING AND HARD TO UNDERSTAND AND I DIDNT LIKE IT AND THE JOKER HAD TO PUT ON MAKEUP!!!  EVRYON KNOWS THAT THE JOKER'S SKIN IS ALWAS BURNT LIKE TAHT!  and teh cionflip was totally RIPPED OFF from NCFOM!  nayone who likd this movie is a GAY FANBOY who needs to move out of their perents basemint and stop sucking Heath Ledger's dead penis lol!

I HATE THIS MOVIE!! I HATE TIHS MOVIE!! I HAET TIS MIOVE!!  I HAET IT!! I HATE IT!! I HEAT IT!!

HATE HATE HAT!!!!!

(http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y16/KeithMoonIsGod/HATEHATEHAT.jpg)
Pictured above: HATE HATE HAT!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on July 19, 2008, 01:25:33 PM
I think I finally understand how it feels to be Keanu Reeves. My mind has been completely blown out, I am an empty shell, and all I can think to say is... woah.

Let me say this upfront... I'm not going to use spoiler tags because I have so much to say, and honestly it's just kind of flowing out of me right now, as I think it. I will try not to say anything that is an actual spoiler, but if you haven't seen the movie yet, go ahead and skip my whole post for now and come back to it later if you're so inclined.

We just got back from the matinee showing here. We don't have a lot of movie goers in this town, so I didn't have to fight with people to get seats, but even still the theater was half full (where normally, on a day like this, a movie like this, and a time like this, there would be a dozen people in all 6 of the theaters total). So for us, it was a big crowd. And other than one group of 4 very annoying teenagers, it was a great crowd. And those 4 actually weren't very bad most of the time.

As far as the movie itself goes, this was the best superhero movie I have ever seen. This was the best action movie I have ever seen. This may even be the best MOVIE I have ever seen, period. It's not normally my style of movie, but it was so god damn good, it pretty much transcends all barriers. As most of you know, I'm a very cynical person and not easily impressed. I went into this excited, but expecting the hype to have been over the top. I was wrong. Dead wrong. All the hype, as crazy as it seemed, was NOT ENOUGH. This movie surpassed all of my expectations. The twists, the turns, the darkness, the imagery, the themes... all of it. Even when I thought I had some stuff figured out, I was either only partially right, or totally wrong. The Nolan Brothers kept you guessing every step of the way. It was quite a ride!

Some little things stood out to me as very powerful images... and I think I better go ahead and use a spoiler tag for this afterall.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Like I said, the writers did a great job of keeping you guessing.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

All of the actors turned in stellar performances on this one, too. I'm not going to talk about what a tragedy it is that Heath is gone, and all that, because we all know that already. I am not going to say that he IS the Joker, because we all know that already. We were there. We saw it. But what I really loved about his performance is that you could FEEL the madness driving him, behind everything he did. Every step of the way, you could hear the tick of insanity in his voice... when he was laughing, when he was scheming, when he was being rational, when he was losing control. He truly has no limits. The scariest part is when you can see that HE honestly believes that he is being rational and logical. Because in a way, he is... but it's skewed. Heath's performance was absolutely flawless. This was villain for all the ages. End of story.

Dent. Holy fucking shit! I avoided spoilers on pictures of his face like the plague, and I'm glad I did, because it totally blew my mind when the reveal finally happened. I knew going in that the scars were going to be make-up, prosthetic, and CGI combined, but the job they did was absolutely amazing. The ichor, the burns, the seared flesh, the fused cartiledge, the bone material, even the charred eyeball. It was fucking incredible... one of the best costume jobs I've ever seen. They even managed to make the suit he was wearing look like he'd really be roasted inside of it on one side. And his performance was incredible as well. His fire, his passion, his dedication... all of them folded in on him and made him even more dangerous and dark when he was finally driven from the light. He really captured the madness that rules Two-Face, his honest belief that random chance is the only true and fair justice. You could see it in his eyes and hear it in his voice, that he was absolutely committed to letting the coin decide everything's fate. He really would have pulled the trigger if it had come scarred side up (every time).

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I don't have much to say about Bale. He did a great job. Both Batman and Bruce felt even better than in the first movie. He's really coming into the role. But, oddly enough, I really don't feel that this movie was about Batman at all. This movie was about Dent's transformation, with Joker's minor role exploding out of its shell and becoming a real force of nature. Chaos... yeah, I can relate to that. :)

I want to see this movie again, right now. But I can't. It's just too powerful. I need to let it sit for a few weeks, THEN watch it again. It will probably impress me even more on second viewing, because even though I know what is going to happen, it's still going to freak me out and thrill me when it does.

When we left the theater, I wanted to walk up to people on the street. "Have you seen it yet? WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU STANDING AROUND FOR??? Go... now! There is no excuse to be standing here. GO SEE IT!"

Also, I think I scared the shit out of my wife by giving her a dangerously accurate "Why so serious?" during the middle of a normal conversation 20 minutes after we left the theater (the only non-Batman-related conversation we've had for the past 2 hours). She doesn't scare easy, but she said it really creeped her out.

The only other thing I have to say is that there is nothing more sad and pathetic than a mean-spirited nerd who thinks hating something just because others like it makes them superior. There's a difference between genuinely disliking something, and choosing to hate it. I can tell the difference when I see it. And I pity those people.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: TheUnabeefer on July 19, 2008, 01:27:44 PM
As I have stated on a few other forums around the net...  I have always said that the Joker, done correctly, should make Hannibal Lector seem like an all-around nice guy.

I used that example back in the late 80's as my argument as to why Burton/Nicholson got it WRONG (that and the whole weird "Joker killed Wayne's parents" thing...  what the hell was up with THAT?!) ...  and I have used that example over the past 19 years as to why we would NEVER see a "true" Joker on screen in American cinema.

Going into the theater, I figured they would tone it down, and Ledger's would be about as good as we could get, but not brutal enough to be considered the "true" Joker for what the character was actually created to be.  Boy was I wrong.

It was perfect... absolutely perfect... and that's why I still am not sure the general public is really ready for the real Joker that we got in this movie.

To quote (well, paraphrase) Jurassic Park... "You were too busy wondering if you COULD do it, you didn't stop to think if you SHOULD... and now you're SELLING it, and SELLING it..."

Oh, and just for the fun of it... a quote from Bob Kane and the other co-developers of Batman and the Joker characters....  "The Joker, done right, should make your stomach churn and make you uncomfortable in your skin."

Heath Ledger deserves an Oscar... Hell, he deserves to be resurrected and given an Oscar.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on July 19, 2008, 01:29:14 PM
I realize I just wrote like 4,000 words and spent a good 30 minutes typing it up, but I forgot to say something.

This movie LITERALLY had me on the edge of my seat. At two different parts for about a total of 30 minutes, I was leaning forward in my chair, hunched over trying to get closer to the screen, to be closer to the action. I couldn't help myself. That's never happened to me in my LIFE. I don't get personally invested in this kind of entertainment... I just don't.

TDK broke me out of my shell of aloofness. Bravo.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 19, 2008, 01:36:29 PM
As I have stated on a few other forums around the net...  I have always said that the Joker, done correctly, should make Hannibal Lector seem like an all-around nice guy.

I used that example back in the late 80's as my argument as to why Burton/Nicholson got it WRONG (that and the whole weird "Joker killed Wayne's parents" thing...  what the hell was up with THAT?!) ...  and I have used that example over the past 19 years as to why we would NEVER see a "true" Joker on screen in American cinema.

Going into the theater, I figured they would tone it down, and Ledger's would be about as good as we could get, but not brutal enough to be considered the "true" Joker for what the character was actually created to be.  Boy was I wrong.

It was perfect... absolutely perfect... and that's why I still am not sure the general public is really ready for the real Joker that we got in this movie.

To quote (well, paraphrase) Jurassic Park... "You were too busy wondering if you COULD do it, you didn't stop to think if you SHOULD... and now you're SELLING it, and SELLING it..."

Oh, and just for the fun of it... a quote from Bob Kane and the other co-developers of Batman and the Joker characters....  "The Joker, done right, should make your stomach churn and make you uncomfortable in your skin."

Heath Ledger deserves an Oscar... Hell, he deserves to be resurrected and given an Oscar.

Exactly, he surpassed my expectations ten-fold and completely immersed himself in the role.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on July 19, 2008, 01:59:52 PM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)



Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: torgosPizza on July 19, 2008, 02:07:08 PM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)



Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on July 19, 2008, 02:10:27 PM
I win.

Seriously though, everything else you wrote is right on the money from where I sit Chaos
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Chaos on July 19, 2008, 02:43:35 PM
Ah, okay then. It happened so fast it was hard to tell. And because the noise level was so high, too.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on July 19, 2008, 05:31:30 PM
I'll fall in line and echo most of the sentiments here that this is a great movie, Ledger was awesome, etc etc etc.  But there was one scene that I hated:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

A question:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: BBQ Platypus on July 19, 2008, 05:50:21 PM
A question:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Right.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Sideswipe on July 19, 2008, 06:47:12 PM
anyone else think Maggie Gyllenhaal is a goddamn ugly mutt?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on July 19, 2008, 07:09:12 PM
A question:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Right.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Bob on July 19, 2008, 07:14:06 PM
anyone else think Maggie Gyllenhaal is a goddamn ugly mutt?

I vote no

(http://www.wallpapergate.com/data/media/772/Maggie_Gyllenhaal_001.jpg)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 19, 2008, 07:18:26 PM
anyone else think Maggie Gyllenhaal is a goddamn ugly mutt?

I vote no

(http://www.wallpapergate.com/data/media/772/Maggie_Gyllenhaal_001.jpg)

No from me too.

Its kind of strange, I almost forgot they had replaced Holmes for this role.  I just didn't think of it once while watching the movie.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 19, 2008, 07:22:27 PM
I loved the killing joke. That's a great line from it. I'm pretty sure that at one point in the comics (maybe also in TKJ) Joker says that even he can't remember his past.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 19, 2008, 07:59:13 PM
I loved the killing joke. That's a great line from it. I'm pretty sure that at one point in the comics (maybe also in TKJ) Joker says that even he can't remember his past.

Yeah, its actually the beginning of that same line.
Quote from: The Joker
I mean, what is it with you?  What made you what you are?  Girlfriend killed by the mob, maybe?  Brother carved up by some mugger?  Something like that, I bet.  Something like that.  Something like that happened to me, you know.  I...I'm not exactly sure what it was, sometimes I remember it one way, sometimes another...If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!  Ha ha ha!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 19, 2008, 08:22:29 PM
I loved the killing joke. That's a great line from it. I'm pretty sure that at one point in the comics (maybe also in TKJ) Joker says that even he can't remember his past.

Really?  I wasn't about it, myself.

I really loved Ledger in this movie - I mean, wow - a few things:

A. He is almost ageless

B. The humor was injected at the perfect moments
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

C. I just didn't like Harvey's
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

D. I'm not a big fan of Maggie Gyllenhall, but she is perfect for this role.  Rachel (if there should've even been one) needs to be someone not totally glamorous but quietly lovely and understated.

Did anyone else dig Maggie's Katherine Hepburn wardrobe?  Loved the whole 30's thing.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 19, 2008, 08:27:28 PM
Did anyone else dig Maggie's Katherine Hepburn wardrobe?  Loved the whole 30's thing.

Seeing it tomorrow but that's something to look forward to, I like nice tailoring me :)

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on July 19, 2008, 08:57:33 PM
anyone else think Maggie Gyllenhaal is a goddamn ugly mutt?

I vote no

(http://www.wallpapergate.com/data/media/772/Maggie_Gyllenhaal_001.jpg)

No from me too.

Its kind of strange, I almost forgot they had replaced Holmes for this role.  I just didn't think of it once while watching the movie.

No from me too.  I think she's uniquely beautiful.  I love that she's not just a typical pretty face, and considering that's really all Katie Holme's Rachel Dawes was, it was a perfect casting change.

EDITED for prettiness:
(http://upload.moldova.org/movie/actors/m/maggie_gyllenhaal/thumbnails/tn2_maggie_gyllenhaal_2.jpg)

But perhaps I'm biased as she's tied for number one on the list of girls I'd go gay for (Eliza Dushku's the other number 1).
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 19, 2008, 09:10:09 PM
Just got back from seeing it for the second time and it was even better this time around.  Just wanted to post a few random thoughts.

I'm not going to worry about spoilers but will tell anyone who hasn't seen it yet not to read any further.

1) Dawes being killed didn't take me by surprise because Eckart screwed up in an interview a while back and pretty much gave it away.  I don't feel like looking up the link right now, but it's out there.  I didn't post about it on here earlier since I didn't want to spoil it for anyone else.

2)  Ledger was amazing.  The magic trick, his recruiting methods, his one phone call, etc.  The Joker was superbly written and acted in this.  It's the Joker I've been waiting to see pretty much all my life.  I love the tip of the hat to Killing Joke with the multiple choice origins.

3)  I am a little disappointed that they didn't go into the Dent/abusive father angle and that they didn't leave his finale open for him to come back.  He is after all one of the best villians.

4)  "I'm not a hero.  I'm what Gotham needs me to be."  Brilliant.

I'll probably have more to add later, but I'm still letting it sink in.  I would like to add though that the audience today was far superior to the one Thursday night.  In that show there was a lot of talking and an unbelievable amount of people text messaging.  But that was in Kennesaw which is filled with spoiled rich kids.  Tonight I saw it in a lower income area with a predominately Black/Latino crowd.  They were great.  Very energetic, laughing, gasping, applauding (especially at the end).  I would hazard to guess that it's because being lower income, going to the movies is a pretty big deal.  They were clearly there to watch a movie (not chitchat or text message).  The right audience makes all the difference.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 19, 2008, 09:13:37 PM
Ok, personally I think the looks in the Gyllenhaal family went to the XY example of the current generation, but really different strokes for different folks.

She's a significantly better actress than "Kate" as Ms. Holmes diminutive hubby likes to call her.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Steve-O on July 19, 2008, 09:20:17 PM
Maggie can look naturally beautiful or she can look very, very homely.  Which is true of most people, I find.

The author of wwtdd.com refers to her as a "sad cartoon turtle", and I can definitely see where he's coming from:

(http://i35.tinypic.com/8xpr9l.jpg)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 19, 2008, 10:04:38 PM
Personally I think Maggie Gyllenhaal is very attractive.  Also a much more believable assistant D.A. than Katie Holmes.  Sure, she isn't super-model material but I like my women to look real.  I've been with around the block a few times and I'll take natural over silicone and cosmetic surgery any day.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: wurwolf on July 19, 2008, 10:16:20 PM
Okay:  *cracks knuckles*  a few things.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)


We went to go see it for the second time today, and I was bothered by point C, too. I kept thinking the entire time,
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: RoninFox on July 19, 2008, 10:21:35 PM
Okay:  *cracks knuckles*  a few things.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)


We went to go see it for the second time today, and I was bothered by point C, too. I kept thinking the entire time,
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 19, 2008, 10:57:26 PM
I thought the Two Face make-up was great.  Personally I'll allow some suspension of disbelief over the exposed eyeball.  At least it wasn't the lame ass Batman Forever version.  And let's face it, there were a couple of other things in the movie that required a great deal of suspension of disbelief (namely Rachael and Batman's fall from the top of a skyscraper with both emerging unharmed).
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: FBX on July 19, 2008, 11:10:32 PM
this movie was glorious
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 20, 2008, 12:26:40 AM
I thought the Two Face make-up was great.  Personally I'll allow some suspension of disbelief over the exposed eyeball.  At least it wasn't the lame ass Batman Forever version.  And let's face it, there were a couple of other things in the movie that required a great deal of suspension of disbelief (namely Rachael and Batman's fall from the top of a skyscraper with both emerging unharmed).

You're absolutely right in everything you've said about this movie.  I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 20, 2008, 12:39:19 AM
Personally, I think think that if they never made another Batman movie after this, I would have no regrets.  I have no idea how or if they can top this film.  To do that, it would have to be not only the greatest movie ever, but the greatest thing ever.  I'm not saying any further sequels would be bad, I'm just saying Nolan and company have a very difficult task ahead of them.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 20, 2008, 12:42:10 AM
Personally, I think think that if they never made another Batman movie after this, I would have no regrets.  I have no idea how or if they can top this film.  To do that, it would have to be not only the greatest movie ever, but the greatest thing ever.  I'm not saying any further sequels would be bad, I'm just saying Nolan and company have a very difficult task ahead of them.


Agreed there, at the least they'd have the problem of what villain to bring into the story.  Doing another Joker story forces them to try and find an actor who can match Heath, and I really can't think of what other villain could carry a Batman movie in this style that hasn't already been seen in this series.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 20, 2008, 12:49:22 AM
Yeah, they're pretty much down to Riddler and Penguin as far as 'real world' compatible villians are concerned.  They could re-cast Joker, but Ledger's performance is going to be a very tough act to follow.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 20, 2008, 01:18:17 AM
Just for the record:
If they ever decided to do a live action Harley Quinn, my vote would be for Fairuza Balk.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 20, 2008, 04:33:54 AM
Yeah, the only villain I can think of to continue the series in the same style would be Riddler. Freeze COULD be "cool" (nyuk nyuk), but both of them have the taint of previous failures.

As far as the suspension of disbelief goes, the scene where batman pulls Lau out of the building is also not possible. No matter how slow that plane managed to reduce its speed, being yanked from zero to that speed would snap your back like a twig. But just like Two Face's eyeball, you forgive it and move on because of how god damn AWESOME it is. :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 20, 2008, 04:36:37 AM
What would a Nolan approved Catwoman be like I wonder.  We did just lose the only developed female character in the series after all, and Bruce will be nice and vulnerable after that.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 20, 2008, 05:01:59 AM
Good point, I can't believe I forgot about Catwoman.  But then again I guess I've never really viewed her as a straight-up villain.  I've always felt that she walked the line between good and evil, never committing to either.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 20, 2008, 05:12:54 AM
Very true, but that could fit the tone of what they're doing to Batman, as they'd both be viewed as criminals by Gotham.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on July 20, 2008, 06:00:18 AM
If they did somehow recast The Joker down the line, I think Joseph Gordon Levitt could pull it off.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 20, 2008, 06:03:28 AM
Personally I want to see Ra's al Ghul's girls turn up
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 20, 2008, 06:05:07 AM
If they did somehow recast The Joker down the line, I think Joseph Gordon Levitt could pull it off.

Well he'd pull off the look, but I don't think I've seen him act in anything since 3rd Rock.

Personally I want to see Ra's al Ghul's girls turn up

That could work well too, depending on how they're introduced.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 20, 2008, 06:09:18 AM
And I think that of the potential antagonists Talia and Nyssa* seem to fit nicely with the aecestic of the Nolan films.

I'm thinking Nyssa would have to have been born a little later than in the comics since the Lazarus Pits don't really feature.

Not sure who would play them though.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Bob on July 20, 2008, 06:09:53 AM
If they did somehow recast The Joker down the line, I think Joseph Gordon Levitt could pull it off.

Well he'd pull off the look, but I don't think I've seen him act in anything since 3rd Rock.
.

He's actually turned into a good actor and has been in some interesting films.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 20, 2008, 06:11:44 AM
Well the Lazarus Pits haven't been featured -yet-.  That could be one way to get Ra's himself back.  Not saying I see it happening as that might be tricky to pull of realistically, but the possibility is there.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 20, 2008, 06:14:49 AM
If they did somehow recast The Joker down the line, I think Joseph Gordon Levitt could pull it off.
Well he'd pull off the look, but I don't think I've seen him act in anything since 3rd Rock.
He's actually turned into a good actor and has been in some interesting films.
We're talking the kid right?

Yeah he's surprisingly good as an actor.

Well the Lazarus Pits haven't been featured -yet-.  That could be one way to get Ra's himself back.  Not saying I see it happening as that might be tricky to pull of realistically, but the possibility is there.

True, I just didn't think it fit with the way Ras was set up in Batman Begins (loved his depiction in that incidentally), but it's always possible.

I'm thinking the two girls would make a nice pair of antagonists.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on July 20, 2008, 06:19:30 AM
If they did somehow recast The Joker down the line, I think Joseph Gordon Levitt could pull it off.

Well he'd pull off the look, but I don't think I've seen him act in anything since 3rd Rock.
.

He's actually turned into a good actor and has been in some interesting films.

See Brick and Manic, definitely.  The former is just a really well done movie, the latter shows JGL giving a really great performance that made me think he could play this role.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 20, 2008, 06:22:47 AM
I kinda don't know if I should feel bad for laughing at nearly everything the joker did in this movie, the magic trick, the jacket full of grenades, the hospital scene, all of it, okay


Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RobtheBarbarian on July 20, 2008, 06:26:01 AM
I kinda don't know if I should feel bad for laughing at nearly everything the joker did in this movie, the magic trick, the jacket full of grenades, the hospital scene, all of it, okay




I laughed too, as I usually do to those kinds of scenes, and for the first time I can remember I actually felt like amusement was the wrong thing to be feeling. Other people in the theater seemed to be having the same thoughts. I think it's a credit to the tone of the movie and the writing of the characters that the Joker's craziness wasn't funny as much as it was creepy.

After the magic trick, once I stopped laughing I started thinking "Holy shit, this guy's serious".
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 20, 2008, 07:33:03 AM
That's what everyone in the room with Joker were thinking too... minus the laughing part. :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: a pretty girl is like on July 20, 2008, 08:10:42 AM
I hope they don't go with a villain for the third film. 

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on July 20, 2008, 08:13:10 AM
As far as the suspension of disbelief goes, the scene where batman pulls Lau out of the building is also not possible. No matter how slow that plane managed to reduce its speed, being yanked from zero to that speed would snap your back like a twig. But just like Two Face's eyeball, you forgive it and move on because of how god damn AWESOME it is. :)

Actually, this is an actual extraction method that special ops guys have used in tricky extraction points after missions.  Granted, I have no link to provide you at this time to prove it, but this type of extraction has been successfully performed in the real world.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: torgosPizza on July 20, 2008, 09:11:11 AM
Here you go. Skyhook aka STARS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulton_surface-to-air_recovery_system
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 20, 2008, 10:29:25 AM
I hope they don't go with a villain for the third film. 

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Got to disagree, and more on that in a mo

Ok just got back and my god it's full of awesome.

Just spectacular, Ledgers performance is stellar (or infernal possibly).

Ok back to a third movie, having seen this I absolutely stand by my earlier contention that Nyssa or Talia or preferably both should make an appearance in a future movie.

I think Nolan's take on Batman eliminates the possibility that we'll see a few of the more outlandish villains, but that means a few of the less well know outside of the comic books might have a chance to shine as some of them are very well suited to the cerebral take on Gotham City.

Which means if they want a big name baddie the next would be the Riddler who I can see fitting into this quite well. I also have an idea about casting that role but I'll think more on that before sharing.

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tyrant on July 20, 2008, 03:04:29 PM

  Pak and I caught DK yesterday since we couldn't make it to any Friday shows due to work schedules.

  I can't really say anything that hasn't been said before about this movie, to be honest. I'm usually a bit cautious when it comes to hype after being burned multiple times because of it, but in the case of DK, it's all true. There are so many psychological layers to this film that it would take a 6-page essay to discuss them all. Pak and I made a point of watching Batman Begins the night before we saw it just so we can compare and contrast. Were I to  be metaphorical, Batman Begins is like Angel Food cake (I'm being racist again) in that it's fluffy and yummy. DK is like cheesecake, where it's much denser, richer and with a more complex flavor. I also happen to prefer cheesecake over Angel Food cake.  ;)  Awesome, awesome movie. Everything a Batman movie should be and more.

  The only thing I didn't like was the fact that the projector wasn't working right so the film jumped around a bit during most of the movie. I'm surprised no one complained and I was tempted for a bit to go to the manager myself and say something (might have scored either a discount or free tickets). There's no excuse for malfunctioning equipment for a movie this huge. But we were hungry by then and just wanted some dinner. We'll be seeing it again soon anyway (hopefully on a better projector).

Something is  bothering me about the film and I'm not sure anyone else noticed it:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

   For the record, I do believe this may be the best incarnation of the Joker ever. Ledger's performance was a flawless balance between Miller's version, the classic version, and TAS version. Also, thanks to Fox Family rerunning Burton's Batman the very night we got home from DK, he may have also been channeling Jack Nicholson's version to a minimal extent as well. That someone could take that kind of complexity and turn it into a believable performance is nothing short of genius.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 20, 2008, 03:05:56 PM
Quote
Batman sequel "The Dark Knight" became box office legend as it opened to over $155 million from 4,366 theaters, the highest opening ever for a three-day weekend. In addition, the film has now become the highest-rated movie on IMDB, beating "The Godfather."

"Dark Knight," from filmmaker Christopher Nolan and returning Christian Bale as the caped crusader, shot past the previous record-holder, "Spider-Man 3," which earned $151.1 million in its debut in May 2007. Batman -- after multiple stops-and-starts, is now the most successful superhero ever to hit the bigscreen.

Musical "Mamma Mia!" was no wallflower either, grossing an estimated $27.6 million from 2,976 runs in its debut to snatch the best opening for a musical in narrowly beating out the $27.5 million opening of musical "Hairspray" on the same weekend last year.

"Dark Knight" earned a record-breaking $67.8 on Friday alone. Of that, $18.5 million came from midnight shows, besting the previous midnight record set by "Star Wars Episode III: The Revenge of the Sith," which grossed $16.9 million from 3,663 venues.

The film easily soared past the $47 million earned by Nolan's "Batman Begins" when opening in summer 2005. Sequel could gross as much as $220 million in its first week domestic -- more than the final domestic gross of "Batman Begins," which earned a total $205 million domestically.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 20, 2008, 03:11:16 PM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tyrant on July 20, 2008, 03:19:12 PM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 20, 2008, 03:23:14 PM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 20, 2008, 03:34:43 PM
A few people have talked about possible next movie villians: 

Some thoughts *ahem*

I think Nolan could do a FANTASTIC Mr. Freeze.  Picture this; a cold icy lair with a beautiful frozen woman (Freeze's dead wife Nora) as a glittering blue center piece -   wooooooo!! 

Andy and I read in an interview that Nolan said he will never do a Penguin - his reasoning is that he thinks he can't work with him - too cartoony. 

Killer Kroc could be pretty sweet as could Bain.   I liked in the first movie how Mr. Zazzz made an appearance in Arkham.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 20, 2008, 06:05:09 PM
I think Nolan could do a FANTASTIC Mr. Freeze.  Picture this; a cold icy lair with a beautiful frozen woman (Freeze's dead wife Nora) as a glittering blue center piece -   wooooooo!! 
I could maybe see that but Freeze verges on the cartoony for me.

Andy and I read in an interview that Nolan said he will never do a Penguin - his reasoning is that he thinks he can't work with him - too cartoony. 
Well, thank pan for that, love the Penguin, can't see any way to fit him into Nolan's Gotham city.

Ok the way I could see it working Is having Mr. Nigma providing the meat of the criminal action while Bruce's new Girlf Talia and her half sister do some above the law criminality.

Off the top of my head that is.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thom_Serveaux on July 20, 2008, 07:23:27 PM
   For the record, I do believe this may be the best incarnation of the Joker ever. Ledger's performance was a flawless balance between Miller's version, the classic version, and TAS version. Also, thanks to Fox Family rerunning Burton's Batman the very night we got home from DK, he may have also been channeling Jack Nicholson's version to a minimal extent as well. That someone could take that kind of complexity and turn it into a believable performance is nothing short of genius.
...and sadly as is often the case a genius that is taken before his time. (or at least before he could make a future sequel down the line..)

Can't say what hasn't already been said.  So I'll touch on the things that stood out the most for me.  The first thing, the sun actually does shine in Gotham.  In previous movies, at least prior to Batman Begins, it seemed that the only time you saw a daytime exterior shot was at Wayne Manor.  Okay, I realize I'm exaggerating a bit.  There were few city scenes in the '89 Batman that took place during the day, but not many.

Secondly, while I have immense fondness for Nicholson's Joker, Ledger's is definitely darker, more twisted & psychotic.  Without giving anything away I just want to say that 'the magic trick' & 'why so serious?' both made me cringe, and look away.  Constantly turning the tables and standing everything on it's head.  Like Bale as Batman said, With the Joker, nothing is as it seems" or something like that...

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I also wanted to cheer at the end when the Joker's "social experiment' failed...
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

About the 'Batpod'/motorcycle...
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Unlike others that preceded this (& Batman Begins, perhaps) It was both the Batman movie we needed & deserved...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 20, 2008, 07:37:14 PM
Did anyone else catch the moment with Gordon
Spoiler (click to show/hide)


The entire audience cheered
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I was surprised that Lt. Ramirez wasn't Montoya.  But after what she did, it's probably best that it's not the same character.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: jasimon1 on July 20, 2008, 07:42:22 PM
I can only echo everything that's already been said. The only thing I can add is that I got really excited when the very first shot in the entire movie was of the building I work in. We got to watch them filming the beginning bank job and it was really cool seeing it translated onto the screen.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 20, 2008, 07:45:55 PM
Well, the Scarecrow could still be a major presence if and when they make a third movie.  Maybe he and Batman will finally get the climactic showdown that the Scarecrow deserves.  And if they did decide to recast the Joker... okay, this just popped into my head, but what about Elijah Wood?  I think he could pull it off.

Did anyone else catch the moment with Gordon
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Actually, yeah, I did notice that!  I'm surprised someone didn't catch that before it went to theatres.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 20, 2008, 07:50:01 PM
I just came back from seeing it again and yes, I noticed Coleman bust out his normal accent on the rooftop.  I thought I caught it the first time around and confirmed it here.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Cosmic Muse on July 20, 2008, 08:23:18 PM
I hope they don't go with a villain for the third film. 

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Got to disagree, and more on that in a mo

Which means if they want a big name baddie the next would be the Riddler who I can see fitting into this quite well. I also have an idea about casting that role but I'll think more on that before sharing.

You know, I partially agree with A Pretty Girl Is Like. It would be interesting to see people view Batman as a villain, when in actuality the violent vigilante crimes were being perpetuated instead by
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Pak-Man on July 21, 2008, 12:27:49 AM
I kinda don't know if I should feel bad for laughing at nearly everything the joker did in this movie, the magic trick, the jacket full of grenades, the hospital scene, all of it, okay




I laughed too, as I usually do to those kinds of scenes, and for the first time I can remember I actually felt like amusement was the wrong thing to be feeling. Other people in the theater seemed to be having the same thoughts. I think it's a credit to the tone of the movie and the writing of the characters that the Joker's craziness wasn't funny as much as it was creepy.

After the magic trick, once I stopped laughing I started thinking "Holy shit, this guy's serious".

That, to me, is what makes this Joker THE Joker. I think everyone takes something different from the Joker. There's the fact that he's nuttier than a fruitcake. There's the fact that he makes the perfect foil for Batman's stern exterior and good interior. To me, what makes a good Joker is that you get so lost and fascinated by him, that when he does something horrible, you find yourself laughing. The horror that follows when you realize "Oh my gosh. I just laughed at a man getting a pencil jammed through his brain" is really what the Joker's all about. The Joker, when executed properly (And this is what The Animated Series did especially well) shares his twisted sense of humor with the audience. He does horrible, unspeakable things and makes you laugh at it. This was astonishingly well done in this movie, and I loved that aspect of the performance.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 21, 2008, 05:35:22 AM
After the magic trick, once I stopped laughing I started thinking "Holy shit, this guy's serious".

That, to me, is what makes this Joker THE Joker. I think everyone takes something different from the Joker. There's the fact that he's nuttier than a fruitcake. There's the fact that he makes the perfect foil for Batman's stern exterior and good interior. To me, what makes a good Joker is that you get so lost and fascinated by him, that when he does something horrible, you find yourself laughing. The horror that follows when you realize "Oh my gosh. I just laughed at a man getting a pencil jammed through his brain" is really what the Joker's all about. The Joker, when executed properly (And this is what The Animated Series did especially well) shares his twisted sense of humor with the audience. He does horrible, unspeakable things and makes you laugh at it. This was astonishingly well done in this movie, and I loved that aspect of the performance.

QFT.

That was the real beauty of Ledger's Joker. For just that couple of seconds, he made YOU react to his behaviour the same way that HE did. You shared his amusement for just long enough to then realize... oh shit, did he just do that?

Never give them what they expect.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 21, 2008, 05:41:01 AM
The only thing that really bothered was that Gotham looked so much like Chicago.  Obviously it was supposed to, but I don't think Gotham would have been cleaned up that fast from the first movie.  The architecture was SO dissimilar from the first movie that it didn't feel like the a Batman movie, but more like the recent Spiderman movies.  Maybe it was because everything took place at night in the first movie, and in this one lots of it took place in daylight.

Otherwise, I liked it but it was a little bit too long.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 21, 2008, 06:40:59 AM
Maybe it was because everything took place at night in the first movie, and in this one lots of it took place in daylight.

I think that might be the reason, I think they filmed in Chicago for Batman Begins as well, there is a certain expectation of a Gothic nature to Batman, and it's difficult to maintain the Gothic touches in the cruel light of day.

I liked the daylight scenes myself, I liked the more realistic seeming (because obviously we're not really dealing with true realism, hence the costumed criminals and crime fighters) depiction of Gotham.



Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on July 21, 2008, 07:56:36 AM
#1 on the IMDb's Top 250:

http://www.imdb.com/chart/top?tt0468569

 ???
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on July 21, 2008, 08:07:32 AM
#1 on the IMDb's Top 250:

http://www.imdb.com/chart/top?tt0468569

 ???

It'll even out, that list is always in flux.

But I bet it stays in the top 10 for awhile.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: pezdrake on July 21, 2008, 08:11:19 AM
I agree that keeping the cartoony element out of it is essential to making a good movie.  

As far as future stories they could easily do a variation of Batman: Dark Victory since they have already included Two-Face and the Falcone families, thought it would require the introduction of Catwoman and Robin, not easy to do alone much less in the same movie.  

The Long Halloween might also be a great one if adapted right.

Victor Zsaz, a non-superpeowered serial killer but so close to that insane murderer type that it might feel like a Joker wannabe.

As far as Batman's rogues go, Riddler and the Mad Hatter might both make that good transfer to the Nolan screen.  


Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on July 21, 2008, 08:12:36 AM
Maybe it was because everything took place at night in the first movie, and in this one lots of it took place in daylight.

I think they filmed in Chicago for Batman Begins as well


They did indeed.  They filmed a bunch of stuff in and around Wicker Park, where I was living at the time.  And a lot of TDK was filmed around (and on top of - they shot a bunch on the roof) of my office.  

As a Chicago girl, I love that they really didn't change much or add much to make Chicago more Gotham-y.  Not even the signs on buildings (Hotel Amalfi, Hotel Monaco, the 7th day Church on Wacker).  
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: jasimon1 on July 21, 2008, 08:19:53 AM
Maybe it was because everything took place at night in the first movie, and in this one lots of it took place in daylight.

I think they filmed in Chicago for Batman Begins as well


They did indeed.  They filmed a bunch of stuff in and around Wicker Park, where I was living at the time.  And a lot of TDK was filmed around (and on top of - they shot a bunch on the roof) of my office.  

As a Chicago girl, I love that they really didn't change much or add much to make Chicago more Gotham-y.  Not even the signs on buildings (Hotel Amalfi, Hotel Monaco, the 7th day Church on Wacker).  

I was just taking about this with a co-worker. Some of the Chicago things annoyed me. For instance, Harvey Dent and the Mayor's office were right next to each other. They obviously filmed them on the same floor of a building just with different views out the windows so it looked to any non-Chicagoans that it was different places. I kinda felt cheated because I wasn't able to get into the movie as much as someone who doesn't walk down those streets every day.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: SmilinJackRoss on July 21, 2008, 08:20:36 AM
I'm curious about the hospital
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: jasimon1 on July 21, 2008, 08:24:33 AM
I'm curious about the hospital
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I'm 99% sure it wasn't done in Chicago. I don't remember hearing about it being done.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 21, 2008, 08:25:36 AM
That was probably done at Pinewood.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 21, 2008, 09:21:29 AM
I'm curious about the hospital
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

loved that scene, love love love love loved it, okay
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: gbeenie on July 21, 2008, 09:38:41 AM
Did anyone else catch the moment with Gordon
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I noticed it when he was barking orders right before that back a police HQ.


I was surprised that Lt. Ramirez wasn't Montoya.  But after what she did, it's probably best that it's not the same character.

Since Renee Montoya is now The Question in the comics, DC probably said "no go" on having it be the same character.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 21, 2008, 09:52:19 AM
I was surprised that Lt. Ramirez wasn't Montoya.  But after what she did, it's probably best that it's not the same character.
Since Renee Montoya is now The Question in the comics, DC probably said "no go" on having it be the same character.

And considering why she's no longer a member of the GPD it'd be a complete reversal of the character.

You know it's funny how accents sound to different ears. When I hear Oldman talking normally he has some sort of weird no geographically specific accent. I think it's like how to many of my family I sound like I have a very slightly American accent while almost Nobody in the US hears that :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: gbeenie on July 21, 2008, 09:54:19 AM
So... yeah. I don't quite know what to say, since so much has been said (and so eloquently) about this movie.

It kind of goes without saying that I loved the film. What should be said, and I've not yet heard, is that The Dark Knight (both the movie itself and its success) is a gigantic Fuck You to all the pseudo-intellectual twits I've heard over the years belittle and deny the larger thematic and narrative ideas presented in comics. Indeed, the one peeve I've had about all the positive reviews for this film is the comments about how "novel" its approach to the material is; it's only "novel" if you've never read a comic (which is not intended to diminish The Dark Knight, which is terrific, in any way). Having endured all the "Pow! Zap! Comics Is All Growed-Up!" headlines of the late-80s, I'd hoped that comics would finally get their proper due as a true, and valid, art form. Guess there's still a ways to go.


p.s. How long before
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
:)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 21, 2008, 11:12:57 AM
Well there are already plenty of cam jobs up on torrent sites if someone is really in a hurry to get footage of the scene to make an icon with. ;)

Note: Do not download a torrent of this movie. GO FUCKING SEE IT IN THE THEATRES!! IT IS WORTH IT.

You thieving bastards... :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 21, 2008, 11:16:28 AM
Yeah i am going back to see it tonight that will make twice i have paid to see it.

Stop stealing you cheap bastards!!! ;D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 21, 2008, 12:29:00 PM
No doubt.  I paid for it in Imax on Friday and a normal theater yesterday.  I'm going to see it in Imax again in about a week or two once the crowds die down a bit around here.  This movie I will have absolutely no qualms paying for again and again, it's just that damn good.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Rattrap007 on July 21, 2008, 12:30:10 PM
Just saw it. Had one major problem. From the scene where Joker is first in jail on had audio problems. Basically the voice track went a little low and the music track kept booming! Let me just state I hate "harsh whisper" batman voice. Having bad audio makes it just worse. I could make out about 85% of what was said from that point but had to strain to hear it. Did get a complimentary ticket to the movies though. May use ti to see some movie I don't want to pay to see as I've just seen this one.

Good movie.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)


Anyway great movie. But DC sucks at putting out big movies. Look at it like this:

DC: We get Batman and Superman films. Modern age we get 2 Batman's and 1 Supes. We also get one based on a graphic novel. The problem with this is the majority of people never really heard about it much. I never read it and really have no interest in it. The people who read it will see it yes, but alot of people won't. Batman and Supes have mass appeal.

Marvel: We have (modern films) 3 X-men movies, 2 different Hulk movies, 2 Fantastic Four films, Daredevil, 3 Spiderman films, 2 Punisher movies, and and Iron Man movie. that is 5 franchises, the start of a new Franchise, and a one shot.

I think DC needs to get off it's ass and do some more characters. I'm not a huge DC fan, but I like the movies. I'd love to see a Flash movie. How about a Green Arrow or Green Lantern? Come on DC you got some great characters, USE THEM!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 21, 2008, 12:36:48 PM

One problem I had was with Joker.. I've always led to believe that he was disfigured and permanently looked that way. But in this movie parts of the make up come off. So is he a deformed freak who looks like a clown 24/7 or is he just a nutcase who does it for effect? If it is the latter does he ever take it off?

I did kinda smile when Joker told Batman "I wish I knew how to quit you.." :clap:


He wasn't wearing the make-up during the scene where he and his gang try to assassinate the mayor while he's dressed up like a cop.  I'm assuming he wears it for theatrical purposes as well as to make his scars stand out.  I liked this approach much more than the chemical bath that Nicholson took.

He never made that "Brokeback Mountain" reference.  He made the reference to "Jerry Maguire" when Tom Cruise said "You complete me".  If Ledger had said the former, it would have been in bad taste if you ask me.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 21, 2008, 12:38:39 PM
Yeah the "You! Com!Plete! Me!" bit got a huge laugh in the screening I was at  :D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 21, 2008, 12:42:22 PM
Yeah the "You! Com!Plete! Me!" bit got a huge laugh in the screening I was at  :D

It did the first time I saw it.  The second time I did, most of the people there were kids whose parents obviously got the reference but went over their heads.  Hell, even a couple of my friends didn't get it, but then again, they're idiots.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Rattrap007 on July 21, 2008, 12:42:57 PM
Oops my bad. I kinda forgot. I remembered it as I wish I knew how to quit you. Still kinda works..
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: kodiakthejuggler on July 21, 2008, 01:17:40 PM
Saw it yesterday morning.

Loved it!

If they don't give Ledger the Oscar they're all worthless. This was The Joker's movie. Plain and simple. Everything else was just a side note.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Raven on July 21, 2008, 03:44:02 PM
Just wanted to say a couple of other things I hadn't noticed reading everyone elses experience.   I saw this 3 times this weekend and the experiences had some similarities.  The Midnight showing had a rowdy croud who riffed on the commercials before the show but the second the actual movie started 400 people shut up at once and didn't say a word till the Joker took his mask off.  Awesome.

I have a question about the opening scene.  Was the gas grenade that the joker placed in the bank manager's mouth supposed to be sleeping gas?
That's how I took it because if he set off sleeping glass with everyone else holding grenades,  that adds a new level of evil.  I kept forgetting to pay close attention but I'm pretty sure they only showed the inside of the vault in the investigation scene so the teller area could have been all blown to hell. 

I like that the joker employs the mentally disabled ensuring that there are no traitors in his crew and his genuine indifference towards them (the one phone call scene). 

Two of my favorite Joker lines were only one word each.  Ledger's delivery on them was perfect.  The first was his "Yeah" in response to Spawn's question about getting away with stealling money from the mob and getting away with it.  The second was how he said "Hi" to Harvey in the hospital.  Awesome. 

I can honestly say that if you held a gun to my head and told me to pick a favorite part of this movie, I don't think I could do it.  If hard pressed I'd say the Joker's dialogue as a whole would have to be my favorite part.  I don't care if it makes me a bad person or not but I thought everything he did was hilarious.  I laughed at the number of knives in his pocket, and the "S" he painted on the side of the semi.  I did get mad at Batman during the final fight scene with the joker, when he didn't let Joker explain where he got his scars.  I don't think I could get tired of those stories.

I thought the semi flip looked really cheesy in the trailors but given the context of how Batman flipped it, it turned out pretty cool.  Batman bouncing his cycle off the wall and stopping looked pretty dumb though.  But if that's the only thing I have to complain about then the movie as a whole is aces. 

I think that there are capable actors who could take up the Joker as Ledger did him if they want to continue his story, but I'm sad Ledger won't be around to do it himself.  The Riddler would be my next choice for villian but the Nolan's should be free to do whatever the hell they want from here on out. 

For those that complain about the Batman voice, get a life.  The easiest thing you can do to mask your voice is to talk in a whisper.  It's a thousand times better than Clooney spouting off dialog that would have everyone in the room wondering where George Clooney got the Batman suit from. 

The cast and crew did a great job of keeping the last hour of the movie a secret.  A lot of people thought the movie was over with Joker's capture or shortly thereafter. 

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Rattrap007 on July 21, 2008, 04:11:29 PM
For those that complain about the Batman voice, get a life.  The easiest thing you can do to mask your voice is to talk in a whisper.  It's a thousand times better than Clooney spouting off dialog that would have everyone in the room wondering where George Clooney got the Batman suit from. 
Adam West never needed to disguise his voice....
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 21, 2008, 04:49:09 PM
For those that complain about the Batman voice, get a life.  The easiest thing you can do to mask your voice is to talk in a whisper.  It's a thousand times better than Clooney spouting off dialog that would have everyone in the room wondering where George Clooney got the Batman suit from. 

Except Christian Bale isn't just "talking in a whisper".  He's making himself sound like someone who's smoked 18 packs of cigarettes a day for the past 27 years and is extremely angry about it. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Raven on July 21, 2008, 04:54:27 PM
For those that complain about the Batman voice, get a life.  The easiest thing you can do to mask your voice is to talk in a whisper.  It's a thousand times better than Clooney spouting off dialog that would have everyone in the room wondering where George Clooney got the Batman suit from. 

Except Christian Bale isn't just "talking in a whisper".  He's making himself sound like someone who's smoked 18 packs of cigarettes a day for the past 27 years and is extremely angry about it. 


Does anybody know if they are digitally changing his voice or if he's doing it himself.   If they aren't altering it by using audio effects then what's the difference. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 21, 2008, 05:20:29 PM
For those that complain about the Batman voice, get a life.  The easiest thing you can do to mask your voice is to talk in a whisper.  It's a thousand times better than Clooney spouting off dialog that would have everyone in the room wondering where George Clooney got the Batman suit from. 

Except Christian Bale isn't just "talking in a whisper".  He's making himself sound like someone who's smoked 18 packs of cigarettes a day for the past 27 years and is extremely angry about it. 


Does anybody know if they are digitally changing his voice or if he's doing it himself.   If they aren't altering it by using audio effects then what's the difference. 

I can't see the logic behind using effects to change Bale's voice.  It sounds much like how a Death Metal singer will alter their voice but talking instead of screaming.  The closest thing I can compare it to is Nathan Explosion's regular talking voice in "Metalocalypse". 

I don't want to hear "well he has all these other gadgets, why doesn't he make something to alter his voice?" any more.  That would be retarded.  The way his voice is now (which is to keep his identity a secret) is to be intimidating.  And if you ask me, it works better than any voice modifier they could come up with.  You don't want Batman to sound like Darth Vader or a robot.  It would take away from the fact that he's only human.  Get over the voice already, those of you who dislike it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 21, 2008, 05:23:02 PM
The thing is the thing people object to is also why it's cool.

Because it's unsettling in some hard to define way.

I kinda liked it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Raven on July 21, 2008, 05:28:39 PM

I can't see the logic behind using effects to change Bale's voice.  It sounds much like how a Death Metal singer will alter their voice but talking instead of screaming.  The closest thing I can compare it to is Nathan Explosion's regular talking voice in "Metalocalypse". 

I don't want to hear "well he has all these other gadgets, why doesn't he make something to alter his voice?" any more.  That would be retarded.  The way his voice is now (which is to keep his identity a secret) is to be intimidating.  And if you ask me, it works better than any voice modifier they could come up with.  You don't want Batman to sound like Darth Vader or a robot.  It would take away from the fact that he's only human.  Get over the voice already, those of you who dislike it.

I agree fully, nobody complains when Henry Rollins does it while singing, and a vigilante running around the city trying to intimidate people is the same goal of most metal bands.  To appear intimidaing and aggressive. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 21, 2008, 05:32:16 PM

I can't see the logic behind using effects to change Bale's voice.  It sounds much like how a Death Metal singer will alter their voice but talking instead of screaming.  The closest thing I can compare it to is Nathan Explosion's regular talking voice in "Metalocalypse". 

I don't want to hear "well he has all these other gadgets, why doesn't he make something to alter his voice?" any more.  That would be retarded.  The way his voice is now (which is to keep his identity a secret) is to be intimidating.  And if you ask me, it works better than any voice modifier they could come up with.  You don't want Batman to sound like Darth Vader or a robot.  It would take away from the fact that he's only human.  Get over the voice already, those of you who dislike it.

I agree fully, nobody complains when Henry Rollins does it while singing, and a vigilante running around the city trying to intimidate people is the same goal of most metal bands.  To appear intimidaing and aggressive. 

I'm not disagreeing with you, I just read this and then thought back to...

Adam West never needed to disguise his voice....

And all I can think of is the Christian Bale Batman voice saying "Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb." and I'm laughing my ass off.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 21, 2008, 05:35:24 PM
see, now I feel sorry for Batman, because now I'm wondering how many times he has to repeat himself, okay.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 21, 2008, 05:53:44 PM
Yeah, I also agree that it makes sense for Batman to disguise his voice.  Michael Keaton did it, Val Kilmer did it less successfully, and Kevin Conroy did it.  I just think Christian Bale could have picked a less annoying voice to use as his Batman voice.  I don't think anyone would disagree, though, that the Bale is the best Bruce Wayne there ever has been.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 21, 2008, 06:44:48 PM
Yeah, I also agree that it makes sense for Batman to disguise his voice.  Michael Keaton did it, Val Kilmer did it less successfully, and Kevin Conroy did it.  I just think Christian Bale could have picked a less annoying voice to use as his Batman voice.  I don't think anyone would disagree, though, that the Bale is the best Bruce Wayne there ever has been.

I don't find it annoying in the slightest, a bit monotone when he's not yelling and just talking, but not annoying.  That's just me though.

Agreed, Bale is the best BW there has ever been and perhaps the best BM, again, just my opinion.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 21, 2008, 06:48:12 PM
Yeah, I also agree that it makes sense for Batman to disguise his voice.  Michael Keaton did it, Val Kilmer did it less successfully, and Kevin Conroy did it.  I just think Christian Bale could have picked a less annoying voice to use as his Batman voice.  I don't think anyone would disagree, though, that the Bale is the best Bruce Wayne there ever has been.

I don't find it annoying in the slightest, a bit monotone when he's not yelling and just talking, but not annoying.  That's just me though.

Agreed, Bale is the best BW there has ever been and perhaps the best BM, again, just my opinion.

I don't know.....I had a BM the other night that was pretty amazing.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 21, 2008, 06:49:46 PM
Yeah, I also agree that it makes sense for Batman to disguise his voice.  Michael Keaton did it, Val Kilmer did it less successfully, and Kevin Conroy did it.  I just think Christian Bale could have picked a less annoying voice to use as his Batman voice.  I don't think anyone would disagree, though, that the Bale is the best Bruce Wayne there ever has been.

I don't find it annoying in the slightest, a bit monotone when he's not yelling and just talking, but not annoying.  That's just me though.

Agreed, Bale is the best BW there has ever been and perhaps the best BM, again, just my opinion.

I don't know.....I had a BM the other night that was pretty amazing.

 :rimshot:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 21, 2008, 06:53:16 PM
Yeah, I also agree that it makes sense for Batman to disguise his voice.  Michael Keaton did it, Val Kilmer did it less successfully, and Kevin Conroy did it.  I just think Christian Bale could have picked a less annoying voice to use as his Batman voice.  I don't think anyone would disagree, though, that the Bale is the best Bruce Wayne there ever has been.

I don't find it annoying in the slightest, a bit monotone when he's not yelling and just talking, but not annoying.  That's just me though.

Agreed, Bale is the best BW there has ever been and perhaps the best BM, again, just my opinion.

I don't know.....I had a BM the other night that was pretty amazing.

Yeah, I pretty much threw a meatball out there for anyone to just knock it outta the park.  Well done.  :clap:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 21, 2008, 06:53:49 PM
I don't know.....I had a BM the other night that was pretty amazing.
And you had a serious on a couple weeks back in a Corn field :scared:

What the Hell do you keep eating?! :speechless:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 21, 2008, 06:57:02 PM
I'd like to thank the Academy....
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 21, 2008, 06:58:11 PM
I'd like to thank the Academy....

and my high fiber diet.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 21, 2008, 06:59:08 PM
I'd like to thank the Academy....

Of Proctology no doubt.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 21, 2008, 07:03:06 PM
Must be a Postal thing.. :-\
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 21, 2008, 07:05:39 PM
Sigh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proctology)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 21, 2008, 07:06:58 PM
Sigh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proctology)
Uh.. knew that.. ::)

I made a Funny yo! :-X
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 21, 2008, 07:08:03 PM
Ah
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 21, 2008, 07:09:18 PM
Ah
PSSH! Mr Bungle.. :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 21, 2008, 07:13:47 PM
FTA:  Proctologists often work closely with urologists.

That's puts a funny image in my head.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 21, 2008, 07:14:49 PM
FTA:  Proctologists often work closely with urologists.

That's puts a funny image in my head.
And this relates to 'The Dark Kight', how?? :o
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 21, 2008, 07:18:47 PM
Light and dark closely linked, like Harvey Dent ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 21, 2008, 07:20:52 PM
Light and dark closely linked, like Harvey Dent ;)

Alrighty then.. :scared:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 21, 2008, 07:22:42 PM
Read An American Dream by Norman Mailer.  The part where he is "servicing" the German maid.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 21, 2008, 07:25:51 PM
Read An American Dream by Norman Mailer.  The part where he is "servicing" the German maid.
OOO :o aah :-X
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 21, 2008, 07:35:53 PM
I've been reading some of the negative comments on IMDB and some of them are pretty damn funny.  My two favorite comments so far:

1)  "The Joker isn't funny, he's just sick. Why bother to have the Joker if he isn't funny?"

2)  "Where's Penguin?  Where's Robin?"
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 21, 2008, 07:42:55 PM
When will the Bat-toosie be used?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 21, 2008, 08:01:23 PM
I'm gonna GEEK OUT here!

Victor Zsaz, a non-superpeowered serial killer but so close to that insane murderer type that it might feel like a Joker wannabe.

Mr. Zsaz is mentioned and briefly has a cameo in the first film :)


RE: Gotham being Chicago, IL


Most DC editors now will tell you that Gotham is supposed to be Chicago, even inthe comics, but I do think that Kane originaly intended for it to be New York. 
I've always thought of Metropolis as Chicago, and Gotham as Manhattan.  Maybe that's just me.

RE: Joker's "flesh" makeup/ cop scene

The Joker DOES make an appearance in the first issue of Batman (Detective Issue #1) as a make-up-less cop.  It's all there!  And it's creepy as hell!! FIND IT NOW!!!

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 21, 2008, 08:09:16 PM


RE: Gotham being Chicago, IL


Most DC editors now will tell you that Gotham is supposed to be Chicago, even inthe comics, but I do think that Kane originaly intended for it to be New York. 

It would make sense for Metropolis to be Chicago in a geographical sense, as the REAL Metropolis is in Illinois.  Close to six hours south of Chicago, but still in Illinois nonetheless.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 21, 2008, 08:21:03 PM
I've been reading some of the negative comments on IMDB and some of them are pretty damn funny.  My two favorite comments so far:

1)  "The Joker isn't funny, he's just sick. Why bother to have the Joker if he isn't funny?"

2)  "Where's Penguin?  Where's Robin?"

Answers"

1) You're not intelligent, you're just retarded.  Why bother posting a comment on something you have no concept of?

2) Where's your head?  Where's your ass?  I can't tell anymore since the two have become one.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Jackster on July 21, 2008, 10:06:03 PM
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

That's all I have to say about Two-Face.

Other than that, this film could possibly be the best superhero movie of all time! It's just so awesome in every way!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Compound on July 21, 2008, 10:42:02 PM
Yeah, I also agree that it makes sense for Batman to disguise his voice.  Michael Keaton did it, Val Kilmer did it less successfully, and Kevin Conroy did it.  I just think Christian Bale could have picked a less annoying voice to use as his Batman voice. 

Ooooh! I'm picturing Bats delivering his lines in an Emo Phillips voice now.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Pak-Man on July 21, 2008, 11:20:17 PM
The Joker DOES make an appearance in the first issue of Batman (Detective Issue #1) as a make-up-less cop.  It's all there!  And it's creepy as hell!! FIND IT NOW!!!

Ooh! *Calls up comic store on the phone. "Yeah. do you have Detective Comics number 1? Uh huh. It's been around forever so it's probably like- cheaper than most comics right? Hello? Why are you laughing?"
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 22, 2008, 05:03:09 AM
RE: Gotham being Chicago, IL
Most DC editors now will tell you that Gotham is supposed to be Chicago, even inthe comics, but I do think that Kane originaly intended for it to be New York. 
It would make sense for Metropolis to be Chicago in a geographical sense, as the REAL Metropolis is in Illinois.  Close to six hours south of Chicago, but still in Illinois nonetheless.

Pretty Sure Metropolis was intitally based on Toronto.

Weird but there it is :)

I always thought of Metropolis as NY while Gotham was more like Buffalo or one of the upstate NY cities that had a worse murder rate that NY once upon a time.

Oh  and is Dent actually dead? I thought so during the film but on further refelection I'm not so sure.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 22, 2008, 05:16:43 AM
I'm not sure about Harvey's current state, it seemed like they were showing us a memorial service in one of the flash-forwards but I suppose they could have been misleading there.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: wurwolf on July 22, 2008, 05:20:19 AM
Oh  and is Dent actually dead? I thought so during the film but on further refelection I'm not so sure.

You know, I kind of thought that, too. It didn't seem like he fell all that far to me -- what, two stories? I mean, I wouldn't want to fall two stories, but I think you would have to fall just right for it to kill you.

I don't know, maybe I'm wrong. Now watch someone come along with a link to an article that says falling two stories can kill you.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 22, 2008, 05:22:07 AM
See I could see it either way.

Immediately prior to that there is the discussion about Gotham retaining her image of her White Knight. Now that could mean not revealing the truth about Dent's final moments or it could mean bundling off the unconscious Dent to Arkham and creating a bit of theatre around his supposed death.

I don't know, maybe I'm wrong. Now watch someone come along with a link to an article that says falling two stories can kill you.

It didn't kill Sal ...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 22, 2008, 06:28:22 AM
The Joker DOES make an appearance in the first issue of Batman (Detective Issue #1) as a make-up-less cop.  It's all there!  And it's creepy as hell!! FIND IT NOW!!!

Ooh! *Calls up comic store on the phone. "Yeah. do you have Detective Comics number 1? Uh huh. It's been around forever so it's probably like- cheaper than most comics right? Hello? Why are you laughing?"


Haha, well, there are cheap archives... ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 22, 2008, 07:19:33 AM
UH-OH! BATMAN BUSTED?! :speechless:

From FoxNews
Quote
Reports: Christian Bale Arrested for Allegedly Assaulting Mother, Sister
Tuesday, July 22, 2008

 AP


July 21: British actor Christian Bale arrives for the European Premiere of 'The Dark Knight', in central London.
LONDON —  "The Dark Knight" actor Christian Bale was arrested on Tuesday for allegedly assaulting his mother and sister, according to British media reports.

Earlier Tuesday, the Welsh-born actor, who plays Batman in "The Dark Knight," was in custody at a central London police station being questioned by officers over the incident, said to have taken place in his hotel suite.

“A 34-year-old man attended a Central London police station this morning and was arrested in connection with an allegation of assault. He currently remains in custody," a police spokeswoman said.

Bale, 34, allegedly lashed out in his suite at Park Lane’s Dorchester Hotel on Sunday.

According to Sky News, Bale's mother Jenny, 61, and sister Sharon, 40, went to police on Monday to make a formal allegation against Bale. The complaint about the actor was then passed on to the Metropolitan Police for further investigation.

Despite the alleged incident and report, Bale was allowed to attend the first European screening of the new Batman blockbuster "The Dark Knight" in London's West End on Monday night.

The film, which stars the late Heath Ledger as Batman's nemesis The Joker, took in a record $158.4 million in its opening weekend in the U.S. last week, overtaking former record-holder "Spider-Man 3."

Bale first made a splash as the child star of Steven Spielberg's "Empire of the Sun" in 1987. His screen credits also include "American Psycho," "The Machinist" and "Batman Begins."

In "The Dark Knight," Bale reprises his "Batman Begins" role of wealthy playboy Bruce Wayne and his crime-fighting alter-ego Batman, a brooding vigilante superhero still scarred by the murder of his parents.

 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on July 22, 2008, 07:45:23 AM
This might be the 9 year old who spent an entire year watching nothing but Newsies talking, but I refuse to believe the allegations are true.  I really hope they aren't.  The police said:

Quote
“It was a very difficult situation,” a source said, “but it would have been wrong to have wrecked the premiere over a complaint which we don’t yet know is founded in truth.”
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: jasimon1 on July 22, 2008, 07:46:43 AM
This might be the 9 year old who spent an entire year watching nothing but Newsies talking, but I refuse to believe the allegations are true.  I really hope they aren't. 

But wasn't he just a little too believable in American Psycho?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Rattrap007 on July 22, 2008, 08:50:45 AM
I can just see him bulling the other prisoners and theatening them in the raspy Batman voice..... that or them mocking him calling him Bruce Wayne or Batman
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: anais.jude on July 22, 2008, 09:08:44 AM
I agree with Courtney. It can't be true.



and this should be a seperate thread....so as not to embarrass anyone.....when they make a new thread about it.....hypothetically
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 22, 2008, 09:09:46 AM
I agree with Courtney. It can't be true.



and this should be a seperate thread....so as not to embarrass anyone.....when they make a new thread about it.....hypothetically
There. There.

It'll be aw'ite in the morning :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 22, 2008, 09:20:07 AM
Kevin Conroy had a much better Batman voice.

Half the people in theater at both showings started laughing every time Batman spoke.

They need to change the voice it is the dumbest thing I have ever hear.

Every other batman stomps all over Bale's Batman voice.

The one weak spot in these movies is these movies.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Dim of the Yard on July 22, 2008, 09:23:30 AM
I don't mind the bat voice.  It could always be worse, after all; they could overdub George Clooney's voice whenever he's in the batsuit.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on July 22, 2008, 09:25:39 AM
I agree with Courtney. It can't be true.



and this should be a seperate thread....so as not to embarrass anyone.....when they make a new thread about it.....hypothetically

Damn your thread locked before I could leave a LEAVE CHRISTIAN ALONE! reply.

EDIT: Just remembered this: Gloria Steinem is his freaking step-mom.  Stepchildren of feminist icons don't beat their mothers! 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: wurwolf on July 22, 2008, 09:33:49 AM
See I could see it either way.

Immediately prior to that there is the discussion about Gotham retaining her image of her White Knight. Now that could mean not revealing the truth about Dent's final moments or it could mean bundling off the unconscious Dent to Arkham and creating a bit of theatre around his supposed death.

I don't know, maybe I'm wrong. Now watch someone come along with a link to an article that says falling two stories can kill you.

It didn't kill Sal ...

Yeah, exactly.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Dim of the Yard on July 22, 2008, 09:56:22 AM
See I could see it either way.

Immediately prior to that there is the discussion about Gotham retaining her image of her White Knight. Now that could mean not revealing the truth about Dent's final moments or it could mean bundling off the unconscious Dent to Arkham and creating a bit of theatre around his supposed death.

I don't know, maybe I'm wrong. Now watch someone come along with a link to an article that says falling two stories can kill you.

It didn't kill Sal ...

Yeah, exactly.

Then again, Sal didn't land on his back.

I read somewhere that they locked up Two Face in Arkham Asylum and put on a public funeral for Harvey Dent to keep things under wraps, but that somewhere is also 4chan, so I very much doubt its authenticity.  It does make for a very interesting theory, though.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 22, 2008, 10:34:23 AM
well it could go either way, really. most of the people who found out that Dent was Two Face ended up getting killed by him... the only ones who didn't would talk (dirty cops, regular cops, and mobsters) even if he resurfaced at a later date.

So Batman's comments about making sure Gotham still had its white knight could have been appropriate regardless of whether or not Dent was ACTUALLY dead. So yeah, either he was in the coffin, or the funeral was a fake and he's locked up "safe and sound" (;)) in Arkham.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 22, 2008, 10:42:34 AM
Does anyone ever spend more then a month in Arkham with out getting out?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 22, 2008, 10:56:56 AM
Well, presumably, the staff. :D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 22, 2008, 11:29:28 AM
Look they have a very progressive Open Door policy on rehabilitation ;)

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 22, 2008, 12:05:43 PM
Yeah if the psycho killer says he is ready to leave they don't question it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Nergol on July 22, 2008, 01:09:13 PM
And just you remember... it's BALE before JAIL, so you better not FAIL....
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: anais.jude on July 22, 2008, 01:10:38 PM


I read somewhere that they locked up Two Face in Arkham Asylum and put on a public funeral for Harvey Dent to keep things under wraps, but that somewhere is also 4chan, so I very much doubt its authenticity.  It does make for a very interesting theory, though.


This is what I think...yup, thought since the memorial.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: TeamRAD on July 22, 2008, 01:23:37 PM
RE: Gotham being Chicago, IL
Most DC editors now will tell you that Gotham is supposed to be Chicago, even inthe comics, but I do think that Kane originaly intended for it to be New York. 
It would make sense for Metropolis to be Chicago in a geographical sense, as the REAL Metropolis is in Illinois.  Close to six hours south of Chicago, but still in Illinois nonetheless.

Pretty Sure Metropolis was intitally based on Toronto.

Weird but there it is :)

Okay, before I proceed...I'm a Marvel guy...so....

I was always under the impression Gotham was Manhattan & Metropolis was *gasp* Washington D.C.

Yeah, I'm dumb.  :P

*ventures back into the Marvel-Verse*
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 22, 2008, 01:33:20 PM
Oh and on my point about Toronto (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060628/superman_returns_cdn_060628/20060628?hub=Entertainment)  :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 22, 2008, 01:35:39 PM
Look they have a very progressive Open Door policy on rehabilitation ;)



I think Arkham is alot like that episode of the Simpsons when Snake goes  "Screw the honor system!"  
and there is a sign on the fence saying "Please DO NOT Escape"
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on July 22, 2008, 01:36:01 PM


I read somewhere that they locked up Two Face in Arkham Asylum and put on a public funeral for Harvey Dent to keep things under wraps, but that somewhere is also 4chan, so I very much doubt its authenticity.  It does make for a very interesting theory, though.


This is what I think...yup, thought since the memorial.


I thought that, but didn't think they'd have *two* fake funerals in one movie.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 22, 2008, 01:38:07 PM
*ventures back into the Marvel-Verse*

Go back to your spaceships and mutant academies!!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 22, 2008, 01:41:08 PM
And your stupid teenagers whining about not being able to get a date,we are talking about REAL comics here!

I never want to speak to you again.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on July 22, 2008, 02:06:32 PM
RE: Gotham being Chicago, IL
Most DC editors now will tell you that Gotham is supposed to be Chicago, even inthe comics, but I do think that Kane originaly intended for it to be New York. 
It would make sense for Metropolis to be Chicago in a geographical sense, as the REAL Metropolis is in Illinois.  Close to six hours south of Chicago, but still in Illinois nonetheless.

Pretty Sure Metropolis was intitally based on Toronto.

Weird but there it is :)

Okay, before I proceed...I'm a Marvel guy...so....

I was always under the impression Gotham was Manhattan & Metropolis was *gasp* Washington D.C.

Yeah, I'm dumb.  :P

*ventures back into the Marvel-Verse*

Don't feel too bad, I thought Gotham was Manhattan as well...I'll join you in the real manhattan to hang out with spiderman.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Bob on July 22, 2008, 02:19:30 PM
I have a friend who's wife is from Metropolis, Illinois.

They have at least one or more days as year where everyone is supposed to dress up.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 22, 2008, 02:39:38 PM
I have a friend who's wife is from Metropolis, Illinois.

They have at least one or more days as year where everyone is supposed to dress up.

What does their annual Vicars and Tarts day have to do with this movie?

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Ortega on July 22, 2008, 02:40:20 PM
Just got back from the noon matinee.






WOW.



Loved it.  Loved every second of it.  Of course Ledger was awesome as The Joker.  Someone who thrived and reveled in chaos.  And Eckhart as Dent was fantastic.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
And it was nice to see two kinds of villians.  One who was turned to evil by events around him and could understand why he turned twisted. And one who was just flat out evil, who you couldnt even understand, and didn't want to understand.  And if you ask me, even though they didn't kill off Joker, i seriously doubt we'll see them bring him back.  Maybe in another 20 years, becuase Ledger's portryal set the bar high.

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Junkyard on July 22, 2008, 02:40:31 PM
Saw the movie. It was good.
It was good enough to make me care about Batman and sympathise with his approch, something the comics and all previous films could not.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 22, 2008, 04:28:09 PM
Look they have a very progressive Open Door policy on rehabilitation ;)



Well if -I- were making the next movie, Joker would be in Arkham right now poisoning the mind of a lovely naive clinical psychologist right now... ;D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 22, 2008, 04:55:46 PM
Look they have a very progressive Open Door policy on rehabilitation ;)



Well if -I- were making the next movie, Joker would be in Arkham right now poisoning the mind of a lovely naive clinical psychologist right now... ;D

Dr. Strange, okay?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 22, 2008, 05:08:15 PM
uhhhh...no not really.

Dr. Strange is lovely?

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 22, 2008, 05:46:21 PM
uhhhh...no not really.

Dr. Strange is lovely?



Hey different strokes I suppose...

Yes let's not have Mia Sarah be the last incarnation of Harley. Though I see a more Courtney Love-like persona for her in this version of Gotham.

And Of course, people are already playing with the ascetic for Harley:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)


Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 22, 2008, 06:07:09 PM
uhhhh...no not really.

Dr. Strange is lovely?



hey, you're the one who said it, okay
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 22, 2008, 06:09:42 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again:
I think Fairuza Balk would make a perfect Harley Quinn.

(http://www.aceshowbiz.com/images/photo/fairuza_balk.jpg)

Anyone, anyone?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: anais.jude on July 22, 2008, 06:12:55 PM
Look they have a very progressive Open Door policy on rehabilitation ;)



Well if -I- were making the next movie, Joker would be in Arkham right now poisoning the mind of a lovely naive clinical psychologist right now... ;D


you and your clown-women fantasies are very disturbing!   :D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 22, 2008, 06:22:18 PM
Look they have a very progressive Open Door policy on rehabilitation ;)



Well if -I- were making the next movie, Joker would be in Arkham right now poisoning the mind of a lovely naive clinical psychologist right now... ;D


you and your clown-women fantasies are very disturbing!   :D

What can I say, I'm a sucker for a smile. 

(http://www.gothampublicworks.com/images/gallery/The%20Lab/classic-harley-quinn_T.jpg)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 22, 2008, 06:32:04 PM
"Though I see a more Courtney Love-like persona for her in this version of Gotham."

Tripe, I would like to take this opportunity to curse you for conjuring up the mental image of Courtney Love in skin-tight spandex.   :gouge:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 22, 2008, 06:52:23 PM
Look at the girl in the vid I posted, she'll wash away the nasty taste :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 22, 2008, 07:16:23 PM
Tripe,
You are forgiven.  I would like to note that from some angles I think she looked a little like Sarah Michelle Gellar.  Which is certainly not a bad thing.   ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 22, 2008, 07:18:23 PM
There are a few pics in that vid that I think work very well as a concept, other not so much, but she is a very pretty girl in many of the shots :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 22, 2008, 07:21:19 PM
Not sure I dig all the costume choices, but the girl in the costume was cool, and obviously she looked like she was having fun.   ;D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 22, 2008, 07:24:16 PM
There an almost full body shot near the beginning, her face is a mostly obscured by the distance and her posture, that seems to work ok (edit: the one about 9-10 seconds in). and a few of the ones where she's crouching down.

Those seem to carry the seed of Nolan Harley within them.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 22, 2008, 07:28:19 PM
The spiked collar didn't really work for me in my image of Harley.  In the same way that I don't think Joker would work with a studded belt, spike bracelet, combat boots, or bondage pants.  Punk rock is one thing, bat-shit insane is another.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 22, 2008, 07:34:14 PM
Oh yes I think that's a fair comment, i don't think she does an exceptional job really but in a few she seems to tap into the right spirit.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 22, 2008, 07:41:59 PM
Agreed.  Though I would like to see Harley as the hottie who, for some reason falls for the unwashed, nihilistic, repulsive psycho.  (I actually have a friend who fits that description and for some reason his local rockstar status has caused more than one gorgeous woman to fall head over heals for him)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: gbeenie on July 22, 2008, 09:45:29 PM
Yeah, I also agree that it makes sense for Batman to disguise his voice.  Michael Keaton did it, Val Kilmer did it less successfully, and Kevin Conroy did it.  I just think Christian Bale could have picked a less annoying voice to use as his Batman voice. 

Ooooh! I'm picturing Bats delivering his lines in an Emo Phillips voice now.

"So I said to the Joker, 'Joker, I'm going to mop up this construction site floor with you.' Then he said, 'Batman, the construction site floor does not exist; at least, not in the permanent sense that the concept, floor, does.' Then I said, 'Does the concept, your head, exist?' Then I surprised him, by juxtaposing the two concepts."
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 22, 2008, 10:26:49 PM
As far as that video goes...I like the fact that it had a "Tank Girl" vibe to it.  Otherwise, I'm indifferent.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: ScottotD on July 22, 2008, 11:03:52 PM
Although I don't think they should make another one for a LONG time, my ideal outline would be this:


The police (except Gordon), Talia Al Ghul, the Mob and Harley Quinn (maybe with Riddler as her... surrogate bf) as the villians.

Harley being batshit crazy killing everyone she comes across and doing Joker-ish stuff but more innocently, possibly being infatuated with Bruce.  Ruining everything for everyone.

Gordon battling against corrupt cops and trying to clear Batman's name.

Riddler being massively OCD and wanting to prove himself to Harley as a 'replacement' for Joker.

Joker locked up like Lecter and messing with/helping Batman to hunt Harley because he wants her safe and maybe jelous of Bruce and/or the Riddler.

Talia,  trying to finish what her father started with help from the mafia who want to start from scratch and has a love/hate relationship with Batman AND Bruce.  She loves Batman but wants him dead, she hates Bruce, Bruce is infatuated with her but doesn't know who she's Ra's daughter.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 23, 2008, 05:04:50 AM
I think you have some good ideas there.  I probably wouldn't include Riddler in that story though.  Between having Harley on the outside, some good scenes of Joker in Arkham, and the relationship between Bruce and Talia I don't think he'd be needed, and adding him in as a replacement Joker would kind of diminish him.  If Riddler ends up in one of these movies I think they're going to need to build him up to be effective, not tear him down a peg.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: TeamRAD on July 23, 2008, 06:09:10 AM

*ventures back into the Marvel-Verse*

Go back to your spaceships and mutant academies!!

*waves from his spaceship*
*goes back to playing Uno w/ Gambit*

RE: Gotham being Chicago, IL
Most DC editors now will tell you that Gotham is supposed to be Chicago, even inthe comics, but I do think that Kane originaly intended for it to be New York. 
It would make sense for Metropolis to be Chicago in a geographical sense, as the REAL Metropolis is in Illinois.  Close to six hours south of Chicago, but still in Illinois nonetheless.

Pretty Sure Metropolis was intitally based on Toronto.

Weird but there it is :)

Okay, before I proceed...I'm a Marvel guy...so....

I was always under the impression Gotham was Manhattan & Metropolis was *gasp* Washington D.C.

Yeah, I'm dumb.  :P

*ventures back into the Marvel-Verse*

Don't feel too bad, I thought Gotham was Manhattan as well...I'll join you in the real manhattan to hang out with spiderman.

It's on, Fortis. The first round of Ray's Pizza is on me!   
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: wurwolf on July 23, 2008, 06:29:34 AM
Yeah, I also agree that it makes sense for Batman to disguise his voice.  Michael Keaton did it, Val Kilmer did it less successfully, and Kevin Conroy did it.  I just think Christian Bale could have picked a less annoying voice to use as his Batman voice. 

Ooooh! I'm picturing Bats delivering his lines in an Emo Phillips voice now.

"So I said to the Joker, 'Joker, I'm going to mop up this construction site floor with you.' Then he said, 'Batman, the construction site floor does not exist; at least, not in the permanent sense that the concept, floor, does.' Then I said, 'Does the concept, your head, exist?' Then I surprised him, by juxtaposing the two concepts."

Awesome.  :clap:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: gbeenie on July 23, 2008, 06:57:47 AM
UH-OH! BATMAN BUSTED?! :speechless:

From FoxNews
Quote
Reports: Christian Bale Arrested for Allegedly Assaulting Mother, Sister
Tuesday, July 22, 2008

 AP


July 21: British actor Christian Bale arrives for the European Premiere of 'The Dark Knight', in central London.
LONDON —  "The Dark Knight" actor Christian Bale was arrested on Tuesday for allegedly assaulting his mother and sister, according to British media reports.

Earlier Tuesday, the Welsh-born actor, who plays Batman in "The Dark Knight," was in custody at a central London police station being questioned by officers over the incident, said to have taken place in his hotel suite.

“A 34-year-old man attended a Central London police station this morning and was arrested in connection with an allegation of assault. He currently remains in custody," a police spokeswoman said.

Bale, 34, allegedly lashed out in his suite at Park Lane’s Dorchester Hotel on Sunday.

According to Sky News, Bale's mother Jenny, 61, and sister Sharon, 40, went to police on Monday to make a formal allegation against Bale. The complaint about the actor was then passed on to the Metropolitan Police for further investigation.

Despite the alleged incident and report, Bale was allowed to attend the first European screening of the new Batman blockbuster "The Dark Knight" in London's West End on Monday night.

The film, which stars the late Heath Ledger as Batman's nemesis The Joker, took in a record $158.4 million in its opening weekend in the U.S. last week, overtaking former record-holder "Spider-Man 3."

Bale first made a splash as the child star of Steven Spielberg's "Empire of the Sun" in 1987. His screen credits also include "American Psycho," "The Machinist" and "Batman Begins."

In "The Dark Knight," Bale reprises his "Batman Begins" role of wealthy playboy Bruce Wayne and his crime-fighting alter-ego Batman, a brooding vigilante superhero still scarred by the murder of his parents.

 

See? This is the inherent risk in having such a heavily British cast and crew -- the increased odds of soccer hooliganism.  :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 23, 2008, 07:04:27 AM
Does anyone have any idea what really happned?

All they keep saying is that an assault took place and that can mean almost anything.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: anais.jude on July 23, 2008, 08:26:00 AM
No. but imdb reported that the Bale also yelled at a bunch of people on the Terminator 2 set.

and his wife has been mysteriously absent from these reports.



looks like my dreams might come true. the bale might soon be single again!  :highfive:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on July 23, 2008, 08:30:22 AM
Does anyone have any idea what really happned?

All they keep saying is that an assault took place and that can mean almost anything.

I read that he got released and all charges were dropped. Apparently he cooperated with the police and they found the allegations to be wrong.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 23, 2008, 08:32:31 AM
Bale was in Terminator 2?!

Still that was more then ten years ago not sure what it has to do with what is happening now?

Ok that's good.

I wonder  what his relationship with his mother and sister is like.  Are they the type of people who would ask for money or something and when he said no fail a phony police report to get back at him?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Compound on July 23, 2008, 08:52:25 AM
No. but imdb reported that the Bale also yelled at a bunch of people on the Terminator 2 set.

(cough) T4, not T2.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 23, 2008, 09:18:19 AM
Does anyone have any idea what really happned?

I could make a guess.

"Our Christian's getting to big for his boots, lets take him down a peg or two"

I mean if it wasn't that, shame on him, but personal experience* makes me wonder...

* Nobody has ever accused me of assult incidentally, but I've a few family members who I could see trying gambits along those lines.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: wurwolf on July 23, 2008, 09:34:16 AM
No. but imdb reported that the Bale also yelled at a bunch of people on the Terminator 2 set.

and his wife has been mysteriously absent from these reports.



looks like my dreams might come true. the bale might soon be single again!  :highfive:

If you pre-fill out your request for restraining orders it will save some time.  ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tyrant on July 23, 2008, 11:07:58 AM
I'll wait and get the scoop on this assault thing when/if Bale writes his autobiography in a few decades. All I really care about is that he makes a good Batman and may/may not make a good John Conner in T4. That's all anyone should care about. Everything else is just media hype and something like this should only be Bale's (and his lawyer's) business and not the public's.

Sorry to sound so grouchy, but this type of thing really ticks me off (as the forum probably knows by now).  :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 23, 2008, 11:13:02 AM
But what if i don't want to help a man who beats woman get rich?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Pak-Man on July 23, 2008, 11:14:14 AM
Then to be safe, you should probably stake out a cave in the mountains and live off berries and nuts. :^)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Bob on July 23, 2008, 11:16:42 AM
Really, what mother calls the cops on her son?

This sounds so fishy it is not funny.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: torgosPizza on July 23, 2008, 11:18:36 AM
But what if i don't want to help a man who beats woman get rich?

Even after the allegations were found to be false by the police?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Dim of the Yard on July 23, 2008, 11:27:30 AM
But what if i don't want to help a man who beats woman get rich?

From my understanding, he never beat them.  The "assault" was verbal and stemmed from the stress that Bale has been under from his strained marriage and the release of Dark Knight.  He flew off the handle, yes, but he never laid a finger on anybody.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 23, 2008, 11:33:16 AM
But what if i don't want to help a man who beats woman get rich?

From my understanding, he never beat them.  The "assault" was verbal and stemmed from the stress that Bale has been under from his strained marriage and the release of Dark Knight.  He flew off the handle, yes, but he never laid a finger on anybody.

Nice, and that makes it even more like I expected it to be. ::)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Bob on July 23, 2008, 11:34:19 AM
But what if i don't want to help a man who beats woman get rich?

From my understanding, he never beat them.  The "assault" was verbal and stemmed from the stress that Bale has been under from his strained marriage and the release of Dark Knight.  He flew off the handle, yes, but he never laid a finger on anybody.

Nice, and that makes it even more like I expected it to be. ::)

You can get arrested for yelling at someone in England?!?!?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 23, 2008, 11:36:08 AM
Nope but moron relatives can go to the old bill and make a complaint which they'll have to investigate. And eveyone's time will be wasted.

EDIT: Er actually (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault#Assault_in_England_and_Wales)

And to think I wanted to be a solicitor once  :-[
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 23, 2008, 01:03:55 PM
I am not saying that Bale beat anyone all i was saying was that we do have a right to know if an actor is found guilty in a trail and goes to jail for beating woman.

Maybe I am alone in this but i don't like giving my mom to men who beat woman.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 23, 2008, 01:11:52 PM
It's on, Fortis. The first round of Ray's Pizza is on me!   


Yeah!  Original Rays!  Not the fake ones!  Or better yet, Frank's on 23rd + Lex Ave.



I saw it again with our friend Mike - and I have to say, there is no 2 hr 30 min movie I'd ever see in the theaters twice - except this film.

Picked up a few things I missed, and more of the plot made sense 2nd time through.  Amazing, amazing film.   




Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Dim of the Yard on July 23, 2008, 01:21:29 PM
Maybe I am alone in this but i don't like giving my mom to men who beat woman.

What a bizarre typo.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 23, 2008, 01:29:58 PM
Maybe I am alone in this but i don't like giving my mom to men who beat woman.

What a bizarre typo.

Please don't elaborate on it either.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Bob on July 23, 2008, 01:59:35 PM
Maybe I am alone in this but i don't like giving my mom to men who beat woman.

What a bizarre typo.

Please don't elaborate on it either.

(http://www.public.asu.edu/~jmlynch/273/images/freud.jpg)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 23, 2008, 02:20:34 PM
But sometimes a mom is just a mom.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 23, 2008, 02:24:09 PM
I meant money.

D'oh!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 23, 2008, 02:54:10 PM
I dunno.  I think it would be interesting if they didn't introduce any new villains in the third movie.  Also, Aaron Eckhart wants to do the third one:  http://www.imdb.com/news/ni0265713/ (http://www.imdb.com/news/ni0265713/).  So maybe Two-Face will return after all.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 23, 2008, 06:36:25 PM
He was my favorite part of this movie so I would be up for that.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: ScottotD on July 23, 2008, 07:14:11 PM
I dunno.  I think it would be interesting if they didn't introduce any new villains in the third movie.  Also, Aaron Eckhart wants to do the third one:  http://www.imdb.com/news/ni0265713/ (http://www.imdb.com/news/ni0265713/).  So maybe Two-Face will return after all.


I really hope not, the whole point of the story was Batman taking the fall to not let Gotham lose hope.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 23, 2008, 07:21:32 PM
For a long time I couldn't help but see Harvey Dent as Bruce Timm had imagined him:
(http://data-allocine.blogomaniac.fr/mdata/4/7/8/Z20050313212430647991874/img/two_face_piece.jpg)


But I think Eckhart/Nolan did a great job of getting away from that, and making something new.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 23, 2008, 07:23:09 PM
The funny thing about hope is that it's a lot more enduring than most people think. Especially when it's had some time to heal.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 23, 2008, 07:27:01 PM
There is still the possibility of Two-Face emerging without the people of Gotham knowing he's Harvey Dent.  After all he would just be viewed as another freak.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 24, 2008, 03:46:17 AM
Yeah, because the right side of his face is so unrecognizable...

I mean, it's not like Harvey Dent had a memorable appearance or anything... :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 24, 2008, 05:36:39 AM
Well I sometime see people in Wal-Mart who look almost the same as famous people.

Just last week i helped some one who looked like presidant Bush!


If I were the people of Gathom I wouldn't assume that the new nut job on the street was Harvey Dent after we had all seen his funeral.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 24, 2008, 05:37:07 AM
Yeah, because the right side of his face is so unrecognizable...

I mean, it's not like Harvey Dent had a memorable appearance or anything... :P

If he gets loose, he might not show his face in public at first.  That might be part of the tension, Two-Face working underground and Batman fighting to apprehend him before he's seen by the rest of Gotham, meanwhile every time Batman himself is seen he come close to being captured himself.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 24, 2008, 05:42:12 AM
Now that sounds like a good movie.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 24, 2008, 08:08:43 AM
Meh.

Neither of the two potential plots that have been mentioned so far really do it for me. Nowhere close to the level of epic that TDK was.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 24, 2008, 08:11:51 AM
Meh.

Neither of the two potential plots that have been mentioned so far really do it for me. Nowhere close to the level of epic that TDK was.

Which two now?

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on July 24, 2008, 10:29:16 AM
Quote
Representatives for Bale released a statement today denying that an assault took place: "Christian Bale attended a London police station today, on a voluntary basis, in order to assist with an allegation that had been made against him to the police by his mother and sister. Mr. Bale, who denies the allegation, co-operated throughout, gave his account in full of the events in question and has left the station without any charge being made against him by the police.

Well there you go, from http://stars.ign.com/articles/892/892546p1.html
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 24, 2008, 12:06:44 PM
Meh.

Neither of the two potential plots that have been mentioned so far really do it for me. Nowhere close to the level of epic that TDK was.

Which two now?

ScottH's about Riddler boning Harley and Ronin's about Two Face's resurfacing.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 24, 2008, 12:08:06 PM
Oh OK, I can't remember, did I put my prospective one down?



Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 24, 2008, 02:28:50 PM
Okay, I just watched it a second time, and frankly, on repeat viewing, there are certain flaws in the film. 

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Dim of the Yard on July 24, 2008, 02:32:25 PM
Okay, I just watched it a second time, and frankly, on repeat viewing, there are certain flaws in the film. 

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

My boyfriend caught some of those the first time he saw the movie.  The second time, I asked a few plot related questions, as well, although they were a little different.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I also saw a few technical flaws, although they didn't really detract from my enjoyment of the movie.  It was more of a, "Huh.  That's weird." moment.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Variety of Cells on July 24, 2008, 03:04:21 PM
Okay, I just watched it a second time, and frankly, on repeat viewing, there are certain flaws in the film. 

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

The cell phone was more of a political statement rather than a neat device, which is why I was able to suspend my disbelief for that one because it did raise a few interesting questions. 

Though i was able to look over most of the other impossibilities because at its heart it felt very realistic.  The way it was shot and presented.  There was no evil doomsday device that was going to blow up the world.  Just a crazy man trying to kill a few people.  I found that much more interesting.

But if you want to talk about realism, how was two face able to keep his profound speaking voice with only half his lips?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: skenderberg on July 24, 2008, 07:19:04 PM
It's a comic book movie.  There's always going to be something that couldn't happen in the real world.  That's why we like them.  While I applaud Nolan's ability to drag the series as far towards realism as he did, at some point you just have to relax and accept that you're watching a movie about a ninja in a bat costume. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 24, 2008, 07:23:53 PM
It's a comic book movie.  There's always going to be something that couldn't happen in the real world.  That's why we like them.  While I applaud Nolan's ability to drag the series as far towards realism as he did, at some point you just have to relax and accept that you're watching a movie about a ninja in a bat costume. 

Exactly. Don't over-analyze.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: The Dark Knight on July 24, 2008, 09:02:21 PM
Well, I guess since it hasn't been to long since The Dark Knight came out I could give my review of the movie. Well I guess its gonna be kinda short but try to enjoy it.

Note: I didn't edit this, I just did this so chillax when it comes to grammar and that stuff.:)

The Dark Knight to me brought something that many superhero movies couldn't bring at all, realism. TDK strived on realism to the point it made you feel like Batman was real and hell he pratically was. TDK strives on realism which is probably the reason its one of the best movies of the year and probably the past 5 years.

The story to me seems to be crunched in a dynamically long 2 Hours and 32 minute time length. This feels terribly long but it really isn't. Past movies that finished of at that length literally made you feel happy to pop out of your seat and leave the theater(Spider-Man 3 and Pirates I'm looking at you) but this film excelled beyond that.  The story maps Batman again being our dynamic none superhero, hero saving Gotham one baddie at a time. Now he has the help from a hotshot DA in Harvey Dent whos flashy ways have booked up all the criminals and made crime low. Two dramatic things happen, 1 Batman realizes that there is no need for his Crusading ways and decides to stop being Batman. 2nd, a new criminal submerges with the calling card of The Joker who uses his psychotic ways and unorthudox ways to do his deeds. The Joker then takes all the remaining mob bosses men and forces them to work for him to get to the Holy Grail for crime bosses...killing The Caped Crusader. I'm gonna leave it off right there.

Batman to me is uncomparable to past movies like Spidey 3 and Iron Man. It doesn't try hard at all and excels in every level. All the actors took out their A game and brought it in this film. None of the acting feels forced and the movie is a rocky climatic 2 hours that will have you on the edge of your seat. Come January, it would be a real disapointment to see neither Heath Ledger or The Dark Knight nominated.

Grade: A
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 25, 2008, 11:31:37 AM
Yes, a man dressing up like a bat and being taken serious is very realistic. Just like a man driving a tank that can go a million miles an hour and destorying an entire cities neighborhood can be cheered by it's citized. If it was one thing this did  bring it was realism alright. I mean we all watch/read super hero movies because of that, don't we? Because it's totally possible to be bitten by something, to fall in something, or to have space men come and develop super powers. Also because every rich person who's family gets killed dresses up like a disease ridden animal, talks like he is constipated, and is not made fun of. Yup. Realism.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 25, 2008, 11:36:38 AM
I liked the more realistic seeming (because obviously we're not really dealing with true realism, hence the costumed criminals and crime fighters) depiction of Gotham.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: The Dark Knight on July 25, 2008, 11:40:50 AM
Yes, a man dressing up like a bat and being taken serious is very realistic. Just like a man driving a tank that can go a million miles an hour and destorying an entire cities neighborhood can be cheered by it's citized. If it was one thing this did  bring it was realism alright. I mean we all watch/read super hero movies because of that, don't we? Because it's totally possible to be bitten by something, to fall in something, or to have space men come and develop super powers. Also because every rich person who's family gets killed dresses up like a disease ridden animal, talks like he is constipated, and is not made fun of. Yup. Realism.

Alright, good class of maturity here. ;), What I was saying was creating a realm of realism into Batman makes the movie better because out of all the superhero's Batman is the closest to our world. Some of the stuff might not be like real stuff you and I can do but its more real than stuff Superman can do. Thats all I was saying.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: wurwolf on July 25, 2008, 11:43:53 AM
I think you missed the poin, Doktor Sleepless. It's not about realism like you'd see outside of your own front door, but rather about realism within the world of movies. If that makes any sense.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 25, 2008, 11:44:47 AM
No man, I now see I'm totally in the wrong here. Clearly my reading of comics for the past half of my current life, and watching as many films from every genre have led me to a narrow way of watching films. Clearly when watching ANYTHING I need to take it as seriously as the film makers do. Hell in some cases even more seriously! Machine girl was supposed to be a remake of some Shakespearan film right?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 25, 2008, 11:47:56 AM
"the mes-en-scene" is the phrase you'll be wanting there Wurwolf :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: wurwolf on July 25, 2008, 11:48:24 AM
No man, I now see I'm totally in the wrong here. Clearly my reading of comics for the past half of my current life, and watching as many films from every genre have led me to a narrow way of watching films. Clearly when watching ANYTHING I need to take it as seriously as the film makers do. Hell in some cases even more seriously! Machine girl was supposed to be a remake of some Shakespearan film right?

Oh good, I knew you'd come around.  :clap:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 25, 2008, 11:54:52 AM
Guys are rubbing off alright. Say guys you know history of violence was based on a graphic novel? Blew my mind when I found out. It's not even about a super hero or something cool like Frank Miller writes. Frank Miller is the best comic book writer ever by the way guys. Yeah though Batman still totally is the best movie ever made. I can't wait for future generations to build a time machine just to save Heath Ledger, so we can have more movies with a guy wearing make up while being an asshole. I'm hoping the next Joker will wear a giant afro wig for no particular reason either.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 25, 2008, 12:01:34 PM
Guys are rubbing off alright. Say guys you know history of violence was based on a graphic novel?

Yes as was The Road to Perdition
and American Splendor
and Ghost World
and Persepolis - (everyone go find that one BTW)
and V for Vendetta

So what? You don't like this one, we understand that, you've failed to add anything new with your subsequent posts.

If you don't like the film an have nothing else to say except "I don't like this film" with different phrasing, why do you bother posting in this thread?

This was what you did back when you were googoogeiger, and look where that got you. ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 25, 2008, 12:08:46 PM
Back when I was googergieger, I like I did in this thread said why I didn't like something, then afterwards after being attacked by everyone on the forum I was accussed of trolling. I've have yet to see a more unbiased an honest review of this movie than was given by me to be honest with you. Everyone hear besides me has just thrown up buzz words and short reviews done by fox tv, or spin, or rolling stone or some shite.

Want something substantial? Keaton was the better Batman, because Keaton was only as serious as the movie/script/world/etc let him. No more, no less. Certain people in this movie and people watching the movie could learn something from that. Now I didn't insult one person with this post. Let us see how all of a sudden everyone will either attack me, accuse me, tell on me, or all of the above, while all I said, as Redux put was "I don't like this movie as much as all of you. I disagree".
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: wurwolf on July 25, 2008, 12:12:45 PM
Back when I was googergieger, I like I did in this thread said why I didn't like something, then afterwards after being attacked by everyone on the forum I was accussed of trolling. I've have yet to see a more unbiased an honest review of this movie than was given by me to be honest with you. Everyone hear besides me has just thrown up buzz words and short reviews done by fox tv, or spin, or rolling stone or some shite.

Want something substantial? Keaton was the better Batman, because Keaton was only as serious as the movie/script/world/etc let him. No more, no less. Certain people in this movie and people watching the movie could learn something from that. Now I didn't insult one person with this post. Let us see how all of a sudden everyone will either attack me, accuse me, tell on me, or all of the above, while all I said, as Redux put was "I don't like this movie as much as all of you. I disagree".

Again, missing the poin. You're getting on people's nerves not because you think the movie blows, but because you came busting in here ragging on people for saying the movie is realistic.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 25, 2008, 12:14:58 PM
Should we go back a few pages to when I stopped posting in the thread and had several pages of me being, in decen terms "ragged" on for saying i don't like this film as much as others do and actually backing up as to why?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on July 25, 2008, 12:17:38 PM
hey Dok, you accused everybody of rehashing reviews, I am under that "everybody" so I will say that my review was strictly from a writers stand point. Not from what I read from anybody else.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 25, 2008, 12:20:26 PM
I shall check out your review in a bit/later then and try to have a real discussion of this movie with someone who hopefully don't just yell at me "This movie is so good though", when I'm explaining to them why it isn't.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: The Dark Knight on July 25, 2008, 12:22:06 PM
Wait, so he is using his comic intellect to offend everyone on here because he didn't like this film. I'm a big big Batman comic reader and this is doesn't really follow the comics but makes it more appropriate for all of the audience to understand. Going on a bash on this movie is ridiculosis because this is easily the best superhero movie ever made. I would hate to see you against Joel Shumacher's piles of poo.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: The Dark Knight on July 25, 2008, 12:27:58 PM
I shall check out your review in a bit/later then and try to have a real discussion of this movie with someone who hopefully don't just yell at me "This movie is so good though", when I'm explaining to them why it isn't.

Well, I hate to break it to you but you are in the very small minority that don't like it. On IMDB it currently resides as the highest rating movie of all-time over classics like 'The Godfather' and 'The Shawshank Redemption' with an outstanding 9.5 by over 20,000 people. It also has a 96% RT rating which is outstanding since the last film only had 84%. I think its just you wanting to complain.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 25, 2008, 12:34:01 PM
Yeah I agree George Bush deserved to win again, we also deserve Arnold to run California for ever. Suffice to say, everything you said about me is wrong. Anywho! I am off to work. I shall talk to you guys later.

Also Oldboy is better than Batman in every way shape or form and unlike Batman truly destroys the comic the movie came from.

Talk later guys!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: The Dark Knight on July 25, 2008, 12:35:03 PM
Wow.... ???
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Nick on July 25, 2008, 02:55:07 PM
While I agree with the Dok on the whole majority argument being useless, the rest of his post is kind of confusing.

Quote
Want something substantial? Keaton was the better Batman, because Keaton was only as serious as the movie/script/world/etc let him. No more, no less. Certain people in this movie and people watching the movie could learn something from that. Now I didn't insult one person with this post. Let us see how all of a sudden everyone will either attack me, accuse me, tell on me, or all of the above, while all I said, as Redux put was "I don't like this movie as much as all of you. I disagree".

Not going to attack you, but I do disagree with your assertion that Keaton was the better Batman. After recently rewatching the original Batman movie, it makes me realize how campy it was, and how much better Batman Begins is. I mean, Batman is a stone-cold killer in the Tim Burton movie, mowing down Jokers minions in his Bat-jet, which totally isn't Batman, more like Frank Castle. At the end of the day though, anyone can dress up in the bat-suit. Bale, IMO, is the better Bruce Wayne, making him the best Batman thus far.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: GregMcduck on July 25, 2008, 03:18:31 PM
An interesting thought I read on another forum:

Quote from: Folby
The reason the boat full of civilians didn't blow up the other boat is because they're cowards, not that they're good people. They voted to do it, just none of them actually could. On the other boat the guy holding the detonator let Zeus/Tiny Lister/Big Evil Black Guy take the detonator thinking he was going to blow up the other boat (and there was no opposition voiced to this idea.) He wanted it but couldn't do it himself. Really only Zeus is a decent human being, and given that it's a comic book movie I think "super bad ass convict is the only good guy" is pretty fitting. The moral characters (Rachel, Batman) know and express why they can't kill people, nobody on the boat did anything close to that, and I would argue that their motivation for not doing it is pretty far from why Batman doesn't kill The Joker.

Thoughts?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 25, 2008, 03:30:07 PM
The fact that only the criminal on that boat could make a decision is why Gotham is in need of Batman.  Everybody in Gotham is indifferent and morally ambiguous.  Only the criminals have the balls to step up and do anything whether that "anything" is bad or good.  This Universe is so different from the Superman Universe.  The Batman Universe is full of morally devoid and lackluster individuals.  In the Superman Universe the people will stand up for themselves and do know what is right and wrong.  They cheer when evil is defeated, and get pissed when evil prevails.  They need Superman to help them.  In Batman's Universe the people could really care less either way.  Everybody is much more self-absorbed.  If they would just stand up for themselves they wouldn't need Batman.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on July 25, 2008, 03:53:27 PM
The fact that only the criminal on that boat could make a decision is why Gotham is in need of Batman.  Everybody in Gotham is indifferent and morally ambiguous.  Only the criminals have the balls to step up and do anything whether that "anything" is bad or good.  This Universe is so different from the Superman Universe.  The Batman Universe is full of morally devoid and lackluster individuals.  In the Superman Universe the people will stand up for themselves and do know what is right and wrong.  They cheer when evil is defeated, and get pissed when evil prevails.  They need Superman to help them.  In Batman's Universe the people could really care less either way.  Everybody is much more self-absorbed.  If they would just stand up for themselves they wouldn't need Batman.

Good analysis, and I have to say, its much more interesting when people are morally indifferent. Chaotic Neutral I guess. It makes the hero's journey much more interesting when he is viewed as more than just a hero.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 25, 2008, 10:33:32 PM
The fact that only the criminal on that boat could make a decision is why Gotham is in need of Batman.  Everybody in Gotham is indifferent and morally ambiguous.  Only the criminals have the balls to step up and do anything whether that "anything" is bad or good.  This Universe is so different from the Superman Universe.  The Batman Universe is full of morally devoid and lackluster individuals.  In the Superman Universe the people will stand up for themselves and do know what is right and wrong.  They cheer when evil is defeated, and get pissed when evil prevails.  They need Superman to help them.  In Batman's Universe the people could really care less either way.  Everybody is much more self-absorbed.  If they would just stand up for themselves they wouldn't need Batman.

I really can't elaborate on this further.  You stole my thunder.  You magnificent bastard  :clap:.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 25, 2008, 10:41:32 PM

The cell phone was more of a political statement rather than a neat device, which is why I was able to suspend my disbelief for that one because it did raise a few interesting questions. 

I think you're reading too much into it.  I mean, why would they make a political statement in a Batman movie?  While there's definitely political satire in the comics (see the Dark Knight Returns), I don't think they'd want to use a Batman movie to make a political statement, because you risk alienating half the potential audience that way.  

I never saw the cell phone thing as a political statement, beyond the obvious "no one person should have too much power, and the people who are most qualified to wield great power are often the ones who are most reluctant to use it."  But that's nothing that's not been said in other movies.  And even if it was the most profound political statement ever made, the way they made it was poorly executed.  It doesn't appear until close to the end of act two, and there's some brief dialogue about how no one should have this much power, Lucius Fox announces his plan to resign, and then there really isn't any follow-up.  
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 25, 2008, 10:53:55 PM
Excellent point BTA.  Has it occurred to anyone else that the boats were actually given their own detonators.  It would be the ultimate joke after all.  The most immoral, self-absorbed people decide to blow up the other boat but just wind up killing themselves.  Also, being given their own detonators would remove the risk of the boats being out of signal range from each other.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: gbeenie on July 25, 2008, 11:09:04 PM
BTW, a bit of stunt casting I'm surprised no one has mentioned before now:

Nestor Carbonell, who plays Gotham's mayor, was also on the cast of the live-action The Tick series-- where he played "Batmanuel."
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 25, 2008, 11:13:18 PM

The cell phone was more of a political statement rather than a neat device, which is why I was able to suspend my disbelief for that one because it did raise a few interesting questions. 

I think you're reading too much into it.  I mean, why would they make a political statement in a Batman movie?  While there's definitely political satire in the comics (see the Dark Knight Returns), I don't think they'd want to use a Batman movie to make a political statement, because you risk alienating half the potential audience that way. 

I never saw the cell phone thing as a political statement, beyond the obvious "no one person should have too much power, and the people who are most qualified to wield great power are often the ones who are most reluctant to use it."  But that's nothing that's not been said in other movies.  And even if it was the most profound political statement ever made, the way they made it was poorly executed.  It doesn't appear until close to the end of act two, and there's some brief dialogue about how no one should have this much power, Lucius Fox announces his plan to resign, and then there really isn't any follow-up. 

True, the same premise has been used in other movies, but it's never been as relevant as it has been now thanks to Dubyah and hs "Patriot Act".

So, I must admit, that I did have a good laugh when Morgan Freeman didn't want anything to do with it in the film.

Hell, at least Nolan is smart enough to do away with the whole thing towards the end.  That in itself is a statement.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Darth Geek on July 25, 2008, 11:14:01 PM
Quote
Has it occurred to anyone else that the boats were actually given their own detonators.  It would be the ultimate joke after all.

The Joker may tell cruel jokes, but he is "a man of his word". Besides, he was proving to the rest of Gotham and especially Batman that one would blow the other up, so switching that would defeat that purpose. Also, he wanted to show that people became animals and a mob when pressured like that, yet they (relatively) calmly held an election to make the choice, rather than all scrambling for the detonator in a mad panic. This disproves Joker's "order breaks down when life is threatened" idea, although it is pretty ludicrous in the movie how rational and non-panicky they are.

That orderly voting on the boat, and the fact that Two-Face's motivation at the end is effectively a childish "it's not fair", and the decision to blame deaths of innocent people on Batman, are my only major issues with an otherwise excellent film.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 25, 2008, 11:14:14 PM
BTW, a bit of stunt casting I'm surprised no one has mentioned before now:

Nestor Carbonell, who plays Gotham's mayor, was also on the cast of the live-action The Tick series-- where he played "Batmanuel."

We got a good laugh out of that at first, it kind of slipped my mind later because at the end of the day...he made a good mayor.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 25, 2008, 11:17:06 PM
Quote
Has it occurred to anyone else that the boats were actually given their own detonators.  It would be the ultimate joke after all.

The Joker may tell cruel jokes, but he is "a man of his word".

He had already lied earlier when he told Batman the opposite positions of Harvey and Rachel.  Screwing with the people on the boats by giving them their own detonators would have been possible.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 26, 2008, 12:42:11 AM
Throughout the film Joker demonstrates a rather loose view of honesty (and in more cases than just the one Ronin mentioned).  He practices deception at almost every turn.  By giving the boats their own detonators he would have an even greater victory.  If the citizens blew themselves up, the people of Gotham would be screaming for the inmates heads.  And if the inmates blew themselves up, the citizens on the other boat would be ostracized from society.  Nobody would ever believe them if they said they didn't press the button.  In either case his point that people will turn on each other would be reinforced.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 26, 2008, 01:33:45 AM

The cell phone was more of a political statement rather than a neat device, which is why I was able to suspend my disbelief for that one because it did raise a few interesting questions. 

I think you're reading too much into it.  I mean, why would they make a political statement in a Batman movie?  While there's definitely political satire in the comics (see the Dark Knight Returns), I don't think they'd want to use a Batman movie to make a political statement, because you risk alienating half the potential audience that way. 

I never saw the cell phone thing as a political statement, beyond the obvious "no one person should have too much power, and the people who are most qualified to wield great power are often the ones who are most reluctant to use it."  But that's nothing that's not been said in other movies.  And even if it was the most profound political statement ever made, the way they made it was poorly executed.  It doesn't appear until close to the end of act two, and there's some brief dialogue about how no one should have this much power, Lucius Fox announces his plan to resign, and then there really isn't any follow-up. 

True, the same premise has been used in other movies, but it's never been as relevant as it has been now thanks to Dubyah and hs "Patriot Act".

So, I must admit, that I did have a good laugh when Morgan Freeman didn't want anything to do with it in the film.

Hell, at least Nolan is smart enough to do away with the whole thing towards the end.  That in itself is a statement.

I think anyone who sees anything in this movie as an intentional criticism of contemporary politics is probably going to see it whether it exists or not. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 26, 2008, 02:04:11 AM
I think a comparison to modern politics is completely justified.  I personally view this as the 'Dirty Harry' of superhero movies.  Batman, while acting for the greater good, does violate many of the principles he should be upholding.  The villain, meanwhile, takes advantage of this and forces our protagonist to violate his ethics.  Like 'Dirty Harry' you can still root for the protagonist while at the same time cringing at his slip toward fascism.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 26, 2008, 02:48:43 AM
Anyone else notice the symbol on Tiny's neck?  I couldn't place it at first, but when I got home I looked at volume 1 of the animated series and saw it.

(http://images.wikia.com/dcanimated/images/7/73/Nostromos2.jpg)

No idea why the symbol of Nostromos would be on Tiny's neck, he bore no resemblance to the character in look or attitude.  Is there another character with a similar symbol I might not know about?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Raven on July 26, 2008, 02:56:03 AM
I think I saw Pat Hingle (Burton' commissioner Gordon) in the funeral prosession as one of the police officers.  I'm not sure if it was him or not cause he went by so quickly.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 26, 2008, 02:57:53 AM
I think I saw Pat Hingle (Burton' commissioner Gordon) in the funeral prosession as one of the police officers.  I'm not sure if it was him or not cause he went by so quickly.

I thought I noticed him the first time I watched it, and I forgot to look in time to double check when I watched it Friday morning.

The fact that it was in IMAX and I was completely lost in the screen might have had something to do with it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Raven on July 26, 2008, 03:34:12 AM
I keep forgetting to double check too.  I caught a matinee yesterday with another friend who hadn't had time to see it yet.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: The Dark Knight on July 26, 2008, 07:38:18 AM
I'll check it next time, gonna go see it a couple times this week. I thought I saw him too but I was completely mixed in the chaos.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 26, 2008, 08:27:08 AM
While I agree with the Dok on the whole majority argument being useless, the rest of his post is kind of confusing.

Quote
Want something substantial? Keaton was the better Batman, because Keaton was only as serious as the movie/script/world/etc let him. No more, no less. Certain people in this movie and people watching the movie could learn something from that. Now I didn't insult one person with this post. Let us see how all of a sudden everyone will either attack me, accuse me, tell on me, or all of the above, while all I said, as Redux put was "I don't like this movie as much as all of you. I disagree".

Not going to attack you, but I do disagree with your assertion that Keaton was the better Batman. After recently rewatching the original Batman movie, it makes me realize how campy it was, and how much better Batman Begins is. I mean, Batman is a stone-cold killer in the Tim Burton movie, mowing down Jokers minions in his Bat-jet, which totally isn't Batman, more like Frank Castle. At the end of the day though, anyone can dress up in the bat-suit. Bale, IMO, is the better Bruce Wayne, making him the best Batman thus far.

Batman and Bruce Wayne are the same characters? The ones with Keaton were incredibly camp. I don't see how people see anything but that from any Batman movies. Hell even these ones are cheesy as fuck, it's just the movie really really takes itself seriously so majority of people decide to do it as well. I mean a lot of what Batman does, could lead to killing. Especially the shit he does on the Batmobile. Him landing on that one car in one of the opening scenes. Hell what about him tossing the dogs from the top floor? I don't know, Keaton again was as serious as the role let him be, and he never spoke as if he was constipated.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 26, 2008, 08:30:46 AM
Well...its time to add my take on this movie..........I love villains, I love deep and complex characters. Its what makes me like some movies other people don't like. Lady in the water for instance, I like it becuase of its characters.

But....they accomplished the impossible here. You see, there are special criteria for a villain to be good and interesting. Here are a few of the options...

misunderstood - used way too much, but can make for some good villains (Voldemort)

able to be redeemed - the villains that in spite of their evil...can still make the right choice (Darth Vader)

Godlike power - These sorts of villains usually don't have a view point and we don't usually see them, but we know how powerful they can be (Sauron)

Downright Evil - Have such hate and rage that they go after the hero relentlessly...these are usually pretty 2D characters (Ganon)


And then...we have the villain that Joker is. This kind of villain is never done...because its very hard to write a villain like the Joker. It is very hard to write a villain that has NO motivation, none whatsoever. Usually these villains are boring, because everyone needs to usually have the motivation. Unless the audience hates the villain, which makes things interesting, but again, this doesn't work if we hate the villain so much we can't stand to see them on screen.

But they accomplished every writers dream of the perfect villain. A force of nature, one that has no rules, no motivation, one that you hate so much, but is so interesting you crave to see more of it. A villain that makes a hero almost become a villain himself to defeat him.

Guys...I've been trying to write a villain like this in one of my books...and its extremely hard, I mean, incredibly hard. I don't think I have the skill to do it, but I was in awe at what the Nolan brothers were able to write, and what Heath Ledger was able to portray. I was giddy as a school boy to see the villain I've always wanted to create, on screen...(though after watching this...I realized that my villain just isn't as interesting as the Joker...oh well. I'll think of something)


Also, everybody's performances were great, especially Christian Bale and Heath Ledger. They were simply incredible. Gary Oldman and Micheal Caine are always fun to watch, and the soundtrack was also great. I love James Newton Howard, and even though I don't really like Hanz Zimmer...his contribution mixed well with James Newton Howards.

All in all, I give this movie a ten out of ten, for making a writer almost piss his pants in glee.

^^?

This the one, scamp?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Variety of Cells on July 26, 2008, 09:45:07 AM

The cell phone was more of a political statement rather than a neat device, which is why I was able to suspend my disbelief for that one because it did raise a few interesting questions. 

I think you're reading too much into it.  I mean, why would they make a political statement in a Batman movie?  While there's definitely political satire in the comics (see the Dark Knight Returns), I don't think they'd want to use a Batman movie to make a political statement, because you risk alienating half the potential audience that way. 

I never saw the cell phone thing as a political statement, beyond the obvious "no one person should have too much power, and the people who are most qualified to wield great power are often the ones who are most reluctant to use it."  But that's nothing that's not been said in other movies.  And even if it was the most profound political statement ever made, the way they made it was poorly executed.  It doesn't appear until close to the end of act two, and there's some brief dialogue about how no one should have this much power, Lucius Fox announces his plan to resign, and then there really isn't any follow-up. 

True, the same premise has been used in other movies, but it's never been as relevant as it has been now thanks to Dubyah and hs "Patriot Act".

So, I must admit, that I did have a good laugh when Morgan Freeman didn't want anything to do with it in the film.

Hell, at least Nolan is smart enough to do away with the whole thing towards the end.  That in itself is a statement.

I think anyone who sees anything in this movie as an intentional criticism of contemporary politics is probably going to see it whether it exists or not. 

The people who made this film live in America for the most part, and are part of our society.  It only makes sense that they would be influenced by current events.  And when you are a writer it's always fun to put little bits of meaning into your films. 

Batman broke the law and used cellphones to spy on everyone in the US in order to catch a terrorist.  I really don't see how you can deny that as an intentional reference to the patriot act.  Though the comment the film made on the patriot act was an interesting one.  It seemed to say that sometimes it is necessary to violate people's privacy to protect them. 

Then again, you could also look at the film and say that it didn't end up working too well.  When he had the cellphone vision on it seemed to hurt him more than help because there was just too much information to look at.  So Nolan left it up for interpretation.  But I'm positive that it's a reference to wiretapping.  And I don't see why you are so against the possibility that Nolan would want to put a little politics in his film.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: The Dark Knight on July 26, 2008, 09:48:26 AM
TDK is almost to 300M...Box Office Mojo reports that it is at $238M in 7 days, it still has 6 more to beat the last record for fastest to 300 million.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Fortis on July 26, 2008, 11:01:09 AM
Well...its time to add my take on this movie..........I love villains, I love deep and complex characters. Its what makes me like some movies other people don't like. Lady in the water for instance, I like it becuase of its characters.

But....they accomplished the impossible here. You see, there are special criteria for a villain to be good and interesting. Here are a few of the options...

misunderstood - used way too much, but can make for some good villains (Voldemort)

able to be redeemed - the villains that in spite of their evil...can still make the right choice (Darth Vader)

Godlike power - These sorts of villains usually don't have a view point and we don't usually see them, but we know how powerful they can be (Sauron)

Downright Evil - Have such hate and rage that they go after the hero relentlessly...these are usually pretty 2D characters (Ganon)


And then...we have the villain that Joker is. This kind of villain is never done...because its very hard to write a villain like the Joker. It is very hard to write a villain that has NO motivation, none whatsoever. Usually these villains are boring, because everyone needs to usually have the motivation. Unless the audience hates the villain, which makes things interesting, but again, this doesn't work if we hate the villain so much we can't stand to see them on screen.

But they accomplished every writers dream of the perfect villain. A force of nature, one that has no rules, no motivation, one that you hate so much, but is so interesting you crave to see more of it. A villain that makes a hero almost become a villain himself to defeat him.

Guys...I've been trying to write a villain like this in one of my books...and its extremely hard, I mean, incredibly hard. I don't think I have the skill to do it, but I was in awe at what the Nolan brothers were able to write, and what Heath Ledger was able to portray. I was giddy as a school boy to see the villain I've always wanted to create, on screen...(though after watching this...I realized that my villain just isn't as interesting as the Joker...oh well. I'll think of something)


Also, everybody's performances were great, especially Christian Bale and Heath Ledger. They were simply incredible. Gary Oldman and Micheal Caine are always fun to watch, and the soundtrack was also great. I love James Newton Howard, and even though I don't really like Hanz Zimmer...his contribution mixed well with James Newton Howards.

All in all, I give this movie a ten out of ten, for making a writer almost piss his pants in glee.

^^?

This the one, scamp?

Yes what about it? I told you that this review was me saying the writing was great, not saying exactly what i read in other movie reviews.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 26, 2008, 01:02:04 PM

The cell phone was more of a political statement rather than a neat device, which is why I was able to suspend my disbelief for that one because it did raise a few interesting questions. 

I think you're reading too much into it.  I mean, why would they make a political statement in a Batman movie?  While there's definitely political satire in the comics (see the Dark Knight Returns), I don't think they'd want to use a Batman movie to make a political statement, because you risk alienating half the potential audience that way. 

I never saw the cell phone thing as a political statement, beyond the obvious "no one person should have too much power, and the people who are most qualified to wield great power are often the ones who are most reluctant to use it."  But that's nothing that's not been said in other movies.  And even if it was the most profound political statement ever made, the way they made it was poorly executed.  It doesn't appear until close to the end of act two, and there's some brief dialogue about how no one should have this much power, Lucius Fox announces his plan to resign, and then there really isn't any follow-up. 

True, the same premise has been used in other movies, but it's never been as relevant as it has been now thanks to Dubyah and hs "Patriot Act".

So, I must admit, that I did have a good laugh when Morgan Freeman didn't want anything to do with it in the film.

Hell, at least Nolan is smart enough to do away with the whole thing towards the end.  That in itself is a statement.

I think anyone who sees anything in this movie as an intentional criticism of contemporary politics is probably going to see it whether it exists or not. 

The people who made this film live in America for the most part, and are part of our society.  It only makes sense that they would be influenced by current events.  And when you are a writer it's always fun to put little bits of meaning into your films. 

Batman broke the law and used cellphones to spy on everyone in the US in order to catch a terrorist.  I really don't see how you can deny that as an intentional reference to the patriot act.  Though the comment the film made on the patriot act was an interesting one.  It seemed to say that sometimes it is necessary to violate people's privacy to protect them. 

Then again, you could also look at the film and say that it didn't end up working too well.  When he had the cellphone vision on it seemed to hurt him more than help because there was just too much information to look at.  So Nolan left it up for interpretation.  But I'm positive that it's a reference to wiretapping.  And I don't see why you are so against the possibility that Nolan would want to put a little politics in his film.

I'm not against the idea.  I'm just saying that it wouldn't make sense.  Lots of people from both sides of the political spectrum are Batman fans.  And if you put a political statement into a film that's part of a franchise that is so universally beloved, specifically a statement that seems to favor one side of the spectrum over the other, you're going to risk alienating all the people who feel differently.  Especially because it's hard to make a political statement without getting too preachy.  If this were an original movie, featuring original characters who have nothing to do with any pre-existing franchises, then it wouldn't matter what political statements Nolan wanted to make.  He could say that owning firearms should not only be legal, but mandatory, or that we should give apes the vote, or whatever.  Again, yes, the Batman comics have made references to contemporary (or contemporary for the time in which they were written) references to politics, but contemporary politics, especially those on a national level, have never been as important in the Batman universe as the politics of Gotham City.  I will grant you that the overall theme of the movie could seem to be a political question as much as a philosophical one, namely escalation.  And the question it raises has far-reaching implications, namely "Does escalating your response to an enemy ultimately make you worse than that enemy, and if so, at what point does it happen?"
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thom_Serveaux on July 26, 2008, 01:20:10 PM
this thread is getting almost as dark as the movie itself...

Let's take a break:
[yt=425,350]cDxgNjMTPIs[/yt]

Everybody's going to see it....

Time-Travelers (:55)
Aliens (from the planet Kamen Rider (1:24)
Santa Claus (1:40)
Jesus (1:54)

JC: "My children, i have come back to you.  The sheer awesomeness of TDK has brought about my second coming, and with it the Rapture.  Which will begin immediately...

...after the 7:45 showing, I gotta see this bad boy..."

IM: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Variety of Cells on July 26, 2008, 01:26:38 PM
You're right.  Taking one side on political issue in a movie like this might bother some people.  But I don't think he took one side.  He presented the situation in a different context, just to give people something to think about.  He didn't say whether it was right or wrong.  He raised a question, as you said.  And I think he did a pretty decent job with it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: anais.jude on July 26, 2008, 01:27:22 PM
Bobo, that was beautiful! Thank you!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thom_Serveaux on July 26, 2008, 01:33:07 PM
I especially enjoyed the cameo of my Savior... (see above) or the previous page...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: YoohooRiffer on July 26, 2008, 01:35:27 PM
I saw this last knight and really enjoyed it.  I do have two questions though, and I'm sorry if they've already been answered but I don't have the time to go back and read the first 50 pages of this thread.

1.  At the very beginning what was the Scarecrow and the fake Batmans doing?  Had they turned good?  Later we see the one fake batman is killed by the Joker and the tape reveals that he wore the batman costume to prove you didn't have to be afraid of scum.  Also Batman tells them that he doesn't need their help.  So has the scarecrow and his gang changed?  His whole inclusion in this film confused me.

2.  Do we think Coleman Reese is going to become a main character in the next film?  He knows Batman's identity so I doubt he will just disappear.  I think he's going to become Robin.  (Not really but it would be funny)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thom_Serveaux on July 26, 2008, 01:44:27 PM
1.) I think the scarecrow was as fake as the batmans, sort of like 'the sons of the bat' in the Dark Knight miniseries back in the day...

2.) Not sure, maybe..

On a somewhat tangential note, due to TDK Cartoon Network is looking to cash in w/ a showing of "Batman Beyond: The Return Of The Joker"  It will more than likely be the edited version, though.  It airs at 5:30 tonight.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Nick on July 26, 2008, 01:46:01 PM
1. I don't think the fake Batmans were with Scarecrow, they were there to stop the drug deal by both sides.  

2. Hopefully Robin doesn't show up at all, I find him lame IMO.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Junkyard on July 26, 2008, 01:49:06 PM
They pretty much pounded the point that Barbara Gordon won't be becoming Batgirl anytime soon into our heads during this film as well. Which is probably a good thing.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 26, 2008, 01:51:27 PM
Well, maybe I just don't think everyone feels the need to make a political statement in everything, and I don't feel the need to look for political statements in every movie I see.  Sometimes I just want to enjoy movies for what they are on the surface, and not think too hard about the "deeper meaning" of every line of dialogue or every image.  My point is that you can find anything you want to in a movie if you look hard enough.  Take of a movie like "Shaun of the Dead".  You could say it comments on how fickle people are, and how easily people abandon their moral standards when faced with adversity, and how stubbornly we revert to the status quo once an adverse situation is under control, or you could say it's just a really funny and all-around well-crafted zombie movie.  Which one is closer to how its creators intended it?  My money is that it's probably closer to the second one than the first.  But that's just my opinion.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 26, 2008, 02:04:09 PM
My brother Matt and my uncle Terrence pointed this out, that really, if you think about it, Coleman Reese didn't actually have any evidence that Bruce Wayne actually is Batman until Fox all but confirms it.  All he knows for sure, and all that he could prove is that Wayne Enterprises designed the Batmobile.  Fox could have claimed that the prototype was stolen, or sold off, or that it was given to Batman by Bruce Wayne, or something like that.  Instead, he just went the route of saying "Okay, you got me.  My boss is Batman.  But if you tell anyone, Batman will come and beat the shit out of you.  So keep your mouth shut, got it?"
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Junkyard on July 26, 2008, 02:26:56 PM
Ugh, but if he HAD gone the evasive route? First: Lame. Second: It would be the one lie that starts a huge, dangerous web of lies.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Dim of the Yard on July 26, 2008, 03:11:29 PM
It didn't sound to me like Fox proved or disproved Reese, actually.  I doubt that even if Fox had been quick on his feet and come up with a reasonable answer as to the missing funds, he still wouldn't have been able to convince Reese that Wayne wasn't Batman.  Fox simply questioned if Reese thought blackmailing somebody whom he thought was the infamous masked man who took out criminals his own way and didn't answer to any kinds of authority, was a very smart thing to do.  He neither confirmed nor denied Reese's claims; he just undermined him, which was probably the best possible way to deal with Reese.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thom_Serveaux on July 26, 2008, 03:28:29 PM
Since someone will eventually bring it up... (or not)   Rather than worrying about the Star Wars Saga in 3-D, how about :

"TDK in 3-D!!!!"
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: The Dark Knight on July 26, 2008, 03:58:31 PM
The Dark Knight has 261.2M so far racking in 23.3M Friday and will be the highest movie this weekend considered that the estimation for Step Brothers and X-Files aren't even close to that.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Variety of Cells on July 26, 2008, 04:22:24 PM
Well, maybe I just don't think everyone feels the need to make a political statement in everything, and I don't feel the need to look for political statements in every movie I see.  Sometimes I just want to enjoy movies for what they are on the surface, and not think too hard about the "deeper meaning" of every line of dialogue or every image.  My point is that you can find anything you want to in a movie if you look hard enough.  Take of a movie like "Shaun of the Dead".  You could say it comments on how fickle people are, and how easily people abandon their moral standards when faced with adversity, and how stubbornly we revert to the status quo once an adverse situation is under control, or you could say it's just a really funny and all-around well-crafted zombie movie.  Which one is closer to how its creators intended it?  My money is that it's probably closer to the second one than the first.  But that's just my opinion.

Sure, if you look hard enough you can find parallels to politics in a lot of things.  However, you can also look at Animal Farm as a cute little story about talking pigs.  But if you do, you are missing a big part of the story.  

I've never heard your argument before.  And i'm pretty surprised actually.  I could possibly understand how you would be annoyed with people who try and make you think about a film if you just want to enjoy it... like if a teacher was making you write a paper about it.  The thing is... no one is forcing you to think about it.  And it seems to me that you are demanding less for your money.  It's like you are complaining that your watermelon has all this red squishy stuff beneath the pretty green skin.  It's hard for me to believe that you are actually asking Hollywood to put less into the films they make.  

The point is, I don't really care if you see the political parallels or not.  You don't have to.  Feel free to get as little out of the film as you like.  But why argue against their existence?  For a lot of people, it's a very cool thing that a big blockbuster is politically conscious in an unbiased way.

(Also, in your shaun of the dead example, I don't see how accepting both of your interpretations at the same time wouldn't make it a more timeless and important film.)

EDIT: I'm making it out as if Batman was some huge political allegory.  It's not, the political relevance is just a quick aside.  Sorry for making it out that way.
 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on July 26, 2008, 05:38:02 PM
1.  At the very beginning what was the Scarecrow and the fake Batmans doing?  Had they turned good?  Later we see the one fake batman is killed by the Joker and the tape reveals that he wore the batman costume to prove you didn't have to be afraid of scum.  Also Batman tells them that he doesn't need their help.  So has the scarecrow and his gang changed?  His whole inclusion in this film confused me.

I looked at the credits, and it said Scarecrow was Cillian Murphy, so it was at least the same actor.

2. Hopefully Robin doesn't show up at all, I find him lame IMO.

Christian Bale has been quoted in saying that he won't do any batmans that have Robin in them. I just can't find the quote.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 26, 2008, 05:51:24 PM
1.  At the very beginning what was the Scarecrow and the fake Batmans doing?  Had they turned good?  Later we see the one fake batman is killed by the Joker and the tape reveals that he wore the batman costume to prove you didn't have to be afraid of scum.  Also Batman tells them that he doesn't need their help.  So has the scarecrow and his gang changed?  His whole inclusion in this film confused me.

I looked at the credits, and it said Scarecrow was Cillian Murphy, so it was at least the same actor.

Scarecrow was dealing with problems the dealers had with the drugs he was selling, the fake Batmen were "trying to help" Batman's cause by shooting people.  Since they didn't have the same morals when it came to crime fighting (don't f'ing try and kill people) Batman put them down with the rest of the criminals..

2. Hopefully Robin doesn't show up at all, I find him lame IMO.

Christian Bale has been quoted in saying that he won't do any batmans that have Robin in them. I just can't find the quote.

I believe what he said was if they did a movie with Robin they'll be doing it without Batman, because he'll have chained himself to a radiator in protest.  Something along those lines anyway.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 26, 2008, 07:45:51 PM
Robin can be a good character when done right.

You just need to get people to stop thinking about Burt ward when you think of him the same way you had to get people to stop thinking about Adam West when they thought about Batman in the 80s.

For me Robin has always been one of the things that seperates batman from his Villains.

Most of Batman's villains work alone but Batman has friends who can help him out and tell him when he goes to far.

Also i think Nolan could do a really good version of Robins origion story.

Also the fact that in his younger year Bruce has to look after Robin gives Bruce something to do when he isn't Batman and gives him a good reason not to let Batman become his whole identity.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: OmegaR! on July 26, 2008, 10:34:54 PM
It didn't sound to me like Fox proved or disproved Reese, actually.  I doubt that even if Fox had been quick on his feet and come up with a reasonable answer as to the missing funds, he still wouldn't have been able to convince Reese that Wayne wasn't Batman.  Fox simply questioned if Reese thought blackmailing somebody whom he thought was the infamous masked man who took out criminals his own way and didn't answer to any kinds of authority, was a very smart thing to do.  He neither confirmed nor denied Reese's claims; he just undermined him, which was probably the best possible way to deal with Reese.

After the Joker added Reese to the hit list, Bruce Wayne saves him, then there is eye contact and a nod between the characters,
reading between the lines, I think there is an understanding between the characters which puts to an end the Reese story arc...

That's my opinion anyway....
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 26, 2008, 10:40:21 PM
It didn't sound to me like Fox proved or disproved Reese, actually.  I doubt that even if Fox had been quick on his feet and come up with a reasonable answer as to the missing funds, he still wouldn't have been able to convince Reese that Wayne wasn't Batman.  Fox simply questioned if Reese thought blackmailing somebody whom he thought was the infamous masked man who took out criminals his own way and didn't answer to any kinds of authority, was a very smart thing to do.  He neither confirmed nor denied Reese's claims; he just undermined him, which was probably the best possible way to deal with Reese.

After the Joker added Reese to the hit list, Bruce Wayne saves him, then there is eye contact and a nod between the characters,
reading between the lines, I think there is an understanding between the characters which puts to an end the Reese story arc...

That's my opinion anyway....

That's what I read into it too.  As greedy as someone might be that encounter told Reese a few things.

1-Yeah, Bruce is Batman.
2-Bruce just risked his ass to save my life.
3-If I betray or blackmail him...he's still Batman and I don't think I want to piss him off.

So either in the interest of self-preservation or gratitude Reese is going to keep his mouth shut now.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 26, 2008, 10:45:44 PM
Well...its time to add my take on this movie..........I love villains, I love deep and complex characters. Its what makes me like some movies other people don't like. Lady in the water for instance, I like it becuase of its characters.

But....they accomplished the impossible here. You see, there are special criteria for a villain to be good and interesting. Here are a few of the options...

misunderstood - used way too much, but can make for some good villains (Voldemort)

able to be redeemed - the villains that in spite of their evil...can still make the right choice (Darth Vader)

Godlike power - These sorts of villains usually don't have a view point and we don't usually see them, but we know how powerful they can be (Sauron)

Downright Evil - Have such hate and rage that they go after the hero relentlessly...these are usually pretty 2D characters (Ganon)


And then...we have the villain that Joker is. This kind of villain is never done...because its very hard to write a villain like the Joker. It is very hard to write a villain that has NO motivation, none whatsoever. Usually these villains are boring, because everyone needs to usually have the motivation. Unless the audience hates the villain, which makes things interesting, but again, this doesn't work if we hate the villain so much we can't stand to see them on screen.

But they accomplished every writers dream of the perfect villain. A force of nature, one that has no rules, no motivation, one that you hate so much, but is so interesting you crave to see more of it. A villain that makes a hero almost become a villain himself to defeat him.

Guys...I've been trying to write a villain like this in one of my books...and its extremely hard, I mean, incredibly hard. I don't think I have the skill to do it, but I was in awe at what the Nolan brothers were able to write, and what Heath Ledger was able to portray. I was giddy as a school boy to see the villain I've always wanted to create, on screen...(though after watching this...I realized that my villain just isn't as interesting as the Joker...oh well. I'll think of something)


Also, everybody's performances were great, especially Christian Bale and Heath Ledger. They were simply incredible. Gary Oldman and Micheal Caine are always fun to watch, and the soundtrack was also great. I love James Newton Howard, and even though I don't really like Hanz Zimmer...his contribution mixed well with James Newton Howards.

All in all, I give this movie a ten out of ten, for making a writer almost piss his pants in glee.

^^?

This the one, scamp?

Yes what about it? I told you that this review was me saying the writing was great, not saying exactly what i read in other movie reviews.

....

Yeah I think around this time when I told you how this was one boring film in my opinion you asked me for my favorites and I decided to give you the all time favorite. I did, and you never replied.

I'm going to go with I won't reply to that post because it's umm...well simply put "it's brilliant how you make a bad guy with no back story." Yeah though, oldboy. Check it out.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Fortis on July 27, 2008, 12:05:58 AM
Well...its time to add my take on this movie..........I love villains, I love deep and complex characters. Its what makes me like some movies other people don't like. Lady in the water for instance, I like it becuase of its characters.

But....they accomplished the impossible here. You see, there are special criteria for a villain to be good and interesting. Here are a few of the options...

misunderstood - used way too much, but can make for some good villains (Voldemort)

able to be redeemed - the villains that in spite of their evil...can still make the right choice (Darth Vader)

Godlike power - These sorts of villains usually don't have a view point and we don't usually see them, but we know how powerful they can be (Sauron)

Downright Evil - Have such hate and rage that they go after the hero relentlessly...these are usually pretty 2D characters (Ganon)


And then...we have the villain that Joker is. This kind of villain is never done...because its very hard to write a villain like the Joker. It is very hard to write a villain that has NO motivation, none whatsoever. Usually these villains are boring, because everyone needs to usually have the motivation. Unless the audience hates the villain, which makes things interesting, but again, this doesn't work if we hate the villain so much we can't stand to see them on screen.

But they accomplished every writers dream of the perfect villain. A force of nature, one that has no rules, no motivation, one that you hate so much, but is so interesting you crave to see more of it. A villain that makes a hero almost become a villain himself to defeat him.

Guys...I've been trying to write a villain like this in one of my books...and its extremely hard, I mean, incredibly hard. I don't think I have the skill to do it, but I was in awe at what the Nolan brothers were able to write, and what Heath Ledger was able to portray. I was giddy as a school boy to see the villain I've always wanted to create, on screen...(though after watching this...I realized that my villain just isn't as interesting as the Joker...oh well. I'll think of something)


Also, everybody's performances were great, especially Christian Bale and Heath Ledger. They were simply incredible. Gary Oldman and Micheal Caine are always fun to watch, and the soundtrack was also great. I love James Newton Howard, and even though I don't really like Hanz Zimmer...his contribution mixed well with James Newton Howards.

All in all, I give this movie a ten out of ten, for making a writer almost piss his pants in glee.

^^?

This the one, scamp?

Yes what about it? I told you that this review was me saying the writing was great, not saying exactly what i read in other movie reviews.

....

Yeah I think around this time when I told you how this was one boring film in my opinion you asked me for my favorites and I decided to give you the all time favorite. I did, and you never replied.

I'm going to go with I won't reply to that post because it's umm...well simply put "it's brilliant how you make a bad guy with no back story." Yeah though, oldboy. Check it out.

Sorry for not replying, I just didn't have anything to say, I couldn't fault you for your choices, and since I hadn't seen it I couldn't praise you for it either. But I have been meaning to check it out on netflix, and not just so that I can rag on you for naming it your favorite  ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 27, 2008, 01:03:39 AM
One of the most perfect movies ever made. I have reccomended it/sold to at least fifteen of my customers and have yet to recieve one complaint and nothing but praise.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 27, 2008, 08:09:00 AM
What is your deal?    ^
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 27, 2008, 08:12:17 AM
I think he has taken Issac's place as biggest jerk on the internet.


Next he is going to say Mike isn't a Christian because he made fun of Nester the long eared Donkey.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thorns of Crimson Death on July 27, 2008, 08:31:43 AM
Let him talk his shit.  He's entitled to his own opinion on the film, no matter how much of a douche he may be about it. 

Bottom line, his negative view of the film takes nothing away from how awesome it was for me.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 27, 2008, 08:40:25 AM
I don't mind him not liking the film.

I didn't think it was perfect.

What i mind is the way he acts like he is better then the rest of us because he doesn't like it and the way he acts like our liking it is a personal attack on him.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: The Dark Knight on July 27, 2008, 08:47:57 AM
Yeah, I'm just gonna ignore him because this movie is the highest IMDB rating movie after 20,000 scores and I mean look at this box office wise. It hit 300M in 10 days. Thats never happen before. Not to mention this movie has a standing 96% RT rating on RottenTomatoe compared to the previous films 84%. If anything he is fighting against a system that is just gonna demolish him in the facts we have.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 27, 2008, 09:18:04 AM
So do you think it will beat Indy 4?

before it was released I heard a bunch of movie people say that there is no way a July movie can beat a may movie.

Do we have the numbers for Indy 4 yet?

I think Indy 4 had just as many problems as the Star Wars prequels and it would be nice to see the best movie make the most money for a change.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Nick on July 27, 2008, 09:35:19 AM
This was Indy 4's total gross as of last week.

$312,569,461
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 27, 2008, 09:39:54 AM
10 days of TDK have come within $12 million of beating Indy after nearly 3 months.

Nice to see a good movie winning.

I still have a bad taste in my mouth from the fact that Sky Captain didn't make a profit.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight
Post by: Cosmic Muse on July 27, 2008, 09:42:40 AM
Yeah I think around this time when I told you how this was one boring film in my opinion you asked me for my favorites and I decided to give you the all time favorite. I did, and you never replied.

I'm going to go with I won't reply to that post because it's umm...well simply put "it's brilliant how you make a bad guy with no back story." Yeah though, oldboy. Check it out.

I thought you said you were leaving this thread for good? Is The Dark Knight's success making you so angry you've reneged on your vow?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 27, 2008, 10:30:18 AM
I thought you all said I wasn't worth the hassle and then started to talk shit about me when I left. I honestly don't know what you all have against me. You say opinions are fine, and that is what I started with. I talked about the movie and why I didn't really like it. That is when you all attacked me and when I came back at you with the equal kind of logic of "lolz if a lot of people like something that means it's good". Facts? Last I checked Spiderman 3 was on the list of highest grossing, as well as Star Wars one. Titanic? IMDB is unfortunately only frequented by people who know eff all about films. I don't really think I am better than any of you, and even if I did, liking movies over other movies wouldn't be one of the reasons. It is important to actually live what we preach. If opinions are fine, stop getting pissy and flamy at my original post that absolutely had nothing deragotory to say to any of the fans of this movie. I like Hot Shots one and two. I don't challenge people to fights because they don't see the genius and re-invention in it. I admit it kind of sucks but I really love anything with Ryan Styles in it. I'm not comparing the films on the same level as they both set out to do different things. I am just giving an example as how I can actually respect peoples opinions and have a conversation with them on how I dissagree.

Also I don't see what me having criticisms on the movie and not thinking it was the best movie of the year and Ledger not deserving an oscar have to do with Mike not christian.

Me: Looks like it's raining.
You: Oh so what, you're a communist now?

^^that kind of logic I'm arguing against.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 27, 2008, 11:01:38 AM
You coming back just proves my original point from way back, regarding mean-spirited nerds. You don't hate this movie because you think it's a bad movie, you hate it because almost everybody else likes it. And somewhere in that steel case you call a skull, you honestly believe that everybody else is stupid - so if we like it, you can't like it. You decided ahead of time that you weren't going to like it, and nothing anybody else (including the movie) says or does is going to shake you of that resolve.

The fact that you couldn't stay out of the thread despite claiming not to care about the rest of our opinions (and in fact have probably posted more over the past 4 pages than any other one person) is proof that you really do care about our opinions - because you must be in opposition to them at all costs.

Incidentally, WHY are you posting on an internet forum if you don't care about the opinions of others? I believe you will find that Notepad serves your opinion sharing requirements quite nicely.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 27, 2008, 11:10:13 AM
So far the only time hate has been used concerning this movie, is you all saying I hate it. I said I liked the movie several times. However like everything I like and dislike there are both good and bad things I like about it. I voted for Shawshank Redemption in that little vs thread, does that mean I voted for it a majority amount of times myself? Several people on this board have talked about films I have watched, hell Oldboy who's dick I suck a hell of a lot is one of the most hipsteriffic movies out there. We often hate the qualities in others we hate in ourselves, friend.

Laugh and the world laughs with you, weep and you weep alone. (:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 27, 2008, 11:13:21 AM
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3008/2706701143_d4c0e644b4_o.jpg)
.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 27, 2008, 11:59:35 AM
Bahahaaa   ^
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 27, 2008, 02:29:56 PM
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3008/2706701143_d4c0e644b4_o.jpg)

 :clap: :clap: :clap:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Raven on July 27, 2008, 02:43:23 PM

I still have a bad taste in my mouth from the fact that Sky Captain didn't make a profit.

I had a bad taste in my mouth when I left the theater after seeing Sky Captain.

You can have all the visuals in the world and they couldn't help me stay awake through that movie.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: stansimpson on July 27, 2008, 03:00:31 PM
There is SO much that I'd like to discuss about TDK (much like the way I am with Nolan's "Memento"), but here's the only thing I need to know right now.  Is telling somebody that Two-Face is in the movie a spoiler?  Here's what happened:  My friend (who hadn't seen the movie) was told in detail about the "magic pencil" act.  He doesn't consider this a spoiler.  But seconds later, I mention Two-Face and he gets indignant that I ruined that for him.  That's a crock of shit if you ask me.  Your thoughts?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Raven on July 27, 2008, 03:01:49 PM
There is SO much that I'd like to discuss about TDK (much like the way I am with Nolan's "Memento"), but here's the only thing I need to know right now.  Is telling somebody that Two-Face is in the movie a spoiler?  Here's what happened:  My friend (who hadn't seen the movie) was told in detail about the "magic pencil" act.  He doesn't consider this a spoiler.  But seconds later, I mention Two-Face and he gets indignant that I ruined that for him.  That's a crock of shit if you ask me.  Your thoughts?

Punch him in the face and show him a magic trick.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 27, 2008, 05:15:10 PM
There is SO much that I'd like to discuss about TDK (much like the way I am with Nolan's "Memento"), but here's the only thing I need to know right now.  Is telling somebody that Two-Face is in the movie a spoiler?  Here's what happened:  My friend (who hadn't seen the movie) was told in detail about the "magic pencil" act.  He doesn't consider this a spoiler.  But seconds later, I mention Two-Face and he gets indignant that I ruined that for him.  That's a crock of shit if you ask me.  Your thoughts?

I purposefully said nothing about Two Face around one of the friends I went with on Friday.  I knew one of them was a Batman fan and the other was only a recent covert to things Batman after she watched Begins.  I didn't want to hint at what happened because I wanted to know her reaction.  (I've also taken the opportunity with another friend I figured out knew practically nothing about Star Wars, so I showed them to her so I could get her take on the "surprises" in the series.) 

Did your friend know Batman characters at all?  If he didn't know them well I can see that as a spoiler, but any fan of the comics, animated series, or who's seen Batman Forever should have known Harvey Dent leads to Two-Face.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Variety of Cells on July 27, 2008, 06:35:46 PM
I talked a lot about IMAX before it came out but haven't said anything about it since.  Well I finally got around to seeing it again at a regular theater, so here are my thoughts.

It does make a difference.  A pretty big one too.  Though strangely the biggest difference didn't have anything to do with the picture.  It was the sound.  To fully appreciate Alfred's quip "Do you think it's loud enough?" you should see it in IMAX.  Those speakers can really belt it out without distorting at all.  It really draws you into the film, and makes it so much more immersive.  You really are surrounded in sound.  I think part of that is thanks to only having one screen, so they don't have to worry about sound bleeding into the other theaters.  The sound alone is almost worth the extra price.

But the picture, as expected, is also superior.  Though once again, not exactly how I expected.  Yes, there is a little difference in sharpness between the 70mm portions and the 35, but if you have decent seats and you're not sitting right next to the screen you aren't going to notice it a whole lot.  However, if you see it in a regular theater the 70mm portions are cropped, and they couldn't always fit everything on the 35mm screen; one example being when the batmobile runs straight into the garbage truck.  In 70mm you see everything, but in 35 the bottom portion is cut off and you can't really see the batmobile. 

So cropping is an issue, but the biggest difference is actually the brightness and color.  The picture seemed drab and a little desaturated compared to the 70mm projection that just seemed to glow, and was so much more vibrant.  That's the first thing I noticed when I saw it again today.  Everything was so rich and clean in the IMAX theater.  I'm guessing the bulb in the 70mm projector is much higher quality and maintenanced more often. 

My conclusion: the IMAX version is definitely worth the price.  If you aren't terribly sensitive to photography then the visual portion might not make a big difference to you, but anyone can tell the difference between amazing sound and the mediocre audio experience you get from a normal theater.  And that's my two cents.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thom_Serveaux on July 27, 2008, 07:53:11 PM
Aside from all that's been mentioned, and I may be repeating myself, I was surprised that the 'batpod', was in fact part of the batmobile that survived after that horrendous crash. That is to say it was a good surprise, no offense, but I hated that batmobile, I mean really HATED it...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 27, 2008, 07:56:21 PM
Haha, not that it had to be, but it certainly wasn't sexy   :D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 27, 2008, 10:02:00 PM
I haven't told people about Two face becouse i didn't know he was in this movie and his showing up was the high point for me.

Most of the people i talked too know that Dent is in the movie but they think that means two face isn't showing up until the next movie.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 28, 2008, 05:54:24 AM
I haven't told people about Two face becouse i didn't know he was in this movie and his showing up was the high point for me.

Most of the people i talked too know that Dent is in the movie but they think that means two face isn't showing up until the next movie.

That was the impression I had when I first started seeing the "I Believe in Harvey Dent" stickers and everything, but it got spoiled for me when i saw the moment of Harvey face down in the gasoline during one of the trailers.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: kodiakthejuggler on July 28, 2008, 07:20:58 AM
So cropping is an issue, but the biggest difference is actually the brightness and color.  The picture seemed drab and a little desaturated compared to the 70mm projection that just seemed to glow, and was so much more vibrant.  That's the first thing I noticed when I saw it again today.  Everything was so rich and clean in the IMAX theater.  I'm guessing the bulb in the 70mm projector is much higher quality and maintenanced more often. 

Plus you're getting so much more resolution with the IMAX camera. It's bigger and better!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 28, 2008, 07:23:54 AM
I hate spoilers to the point that i try to avoid trailers whenever I can.

So i had no idea.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: stansimpson on July 28, 2008, 07:48:48 AM
Did your friend know Batman characters at all? 
Y'see, I thought my friend DID know Batman characters.  He's fairly prescient about nerdy things, so I was kinda taken back that he didn't know who Harvey Dent was.  And it's not like I don't agree that Two-Face *could* be a spoiler, but I think the thing that irks me most is that my friend didn't consider the magic pencil trick a spoiler.  Then again, how can he understand how much the impact of surprise will be lost until he sees the Joker burying that pencil into the table.  Harvey Dent = Two-Face is practically public domain for cryin' out loud!  I should just tell him that neither ship blows up in the end just to spite him.  Well nah... I couldn't do that.  And ya wanna know how he found out?  "Dude, my favorite part of the movie is..." is how it began.  Maybe if I said "Dude, my favorite part of the movie is when Two-Face shows up."  Maybe THEN it wouldn't be a spoiler.  Ugh.

Punch him in the face and show him a magic trick.
AWESOME response  :clap:

Btw, sorry if I'm a little perturbed.  I have some FEMA-like beuracracy shit going on at work.  Is it *my* problem that I don't harrass my supervisors about a problem?  Shouldn't a "Hey, I got a real problem here" suffice?  Maybe next time I'll just take a shit in the hallway.  That seemed to work for Katrina.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 28, 2008, 07:51:12 AM
Prefacing anything with "dude" automatically makes it not a spoiler.

"Dude, you know who that Kaiser Soze is?  Well it turns out it's..."
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Thom_Serveaux on July 28, 2008, 09:55:17 AM
Hey I'm still holding out for the next Batman movie to be in 3-D...


...


What?  It works for Lucas, so it must be a good idea....
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on July 28, 2008, 01:46:32 PM
I think he has taken Issac's place as biggest jerk on the internet.

I was NEVER a jerk. You, on the other hand, are a fucking putz.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 28, 2008, 01:48:59 PM
I like you, Isaac :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 28, 2008, 01:53:10 PM
I think he has taken Issac's place as biggest jerk on the internet.

I was NEVER a jerk. You, on the other hand, are a fucking putz.

Yeah there is nothing jerkish about calling someone a Fucking Putz.

Gee just when i think i'm out he pulls me back in.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 28, 2008, 01:56:03 PM
I like you, Isaac :)
clever girl... 8)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on July 28, 2008, 01:56:32 PM
Gee just when i think i'm out he pulls me back in.

...you can check out, but you can never leave.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 28, 2008, 01:57:12 PM
Gee just when i think i'm out he pulls me back in.

...you can check out, but you can never leave.
Damn that Hotel California! :angry:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 28, 2008, 01:57:53 PM
Tomorrow this thread will be exactly one year old!


(http://hardwarelogic.com/articles/blogs/Website_Reviews_and_You/MoreYouKnow.jpg)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on July 28, 2008, 01:58:59 PM
This thread'll be walking before you know it and drinking out of sippy cups.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 28, 2008, 02:00:37 PM
Kinda like 'Trapper-Keeper' Cartman.. :D :D :scared:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: dignan on July 28, 2008, 02:03:20 PM
I don't really think I am better than any of you, and even if I did, liking movies over other movies wouldn't be one of the reasons.

I, on the other hand, actually DO think I'm better than everybody else, and it ENTIRELY concerns which movies I like over other movies.  I mean, how else would I be able to calculate my own awesomeness?     
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 28, 2008, 02:16:17 PM
Hey i've got an idea.

Let's start a thread about how much we hate The Dark Knight then Doctor Sleepless will be forced to like it ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 28, 2008, 07:15:34 PM
I don't know I hated family guy before everyone did, and still do now. Then again for all I know you all may love family guy for being the greatest super hero movie of all time.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on July 28, 2008, 07:23:58 PM
I don't know I hated family guy before everyone did, and still do now. Then again for all I know you all may love family guy for being the greatest super hero movie of all time.

Actually i'm the greatest superhero of all time.


...just thought you should know.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Wheaty Petestraw on July 28, 2008, 07:52:46 PM
What a terrible movie. Just another case of Hollywood hyping up a summer blockbuster that ultimately fails. So what was wrong with it? To begin with, the movie was FAR too long... there were scenes that needn't have been included, such as the board meeting, the guy attempting to blackmail Bruce Wayne, that whole bit about getting a new suit..

Christian Bale is the wrong choice for Batman and his voice was laughable.. he sounded like a constipated chain-smoker. Heath Ledger was above average as The Joker, but what was the deal with his having no origin? Was this movie supposed to be based on the animated series and not the comic book?

Unfortunately, there will undoubtedly be another sequel and the public will eat it up no matter how disgusting the film is. Me? I'd much rather have those campy Schumacher versions. At least they weren't overrated, terrible as they may have been.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Nick on July 28, 2008, 08:09:18 PM
Quote
what was the deal with his having no origin? Was this movie supposed to be based on the animated series and not the comic book?

As far as I know, he didn't really have an origin in the comics either.

Quote
Unfortunately, there will undoubtedly be another sequel and the public will eat it up no matter how disgusting the film is. Me? I'd much rather have those campy Schumacher versions. At least they weren't overrated, terrible as they may have been.

As bad as Shumacer? Come on. I think your indulging in a bit of hyperbole there.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on July 28, 2008, 08:36:13 PM
What a terrible movie. Just another case of Hollywood hyping up a summer blockbuster that ultimately fails. So what was wrong with it? To begin with, the movie was FAR too long... there were scenes that needn't have been included, such as the board meeting, the guy attempting to blackmail Bruce Wayne, that whole bit about getting a new suit..

Seriously? I've been waiting for a movie that is long and paced like this. I'm kind of sick of 90 minute movies that are over SO fast, because there was no characterization whatsoever.

Quote
Christian Bale is the wrong choice for Batman and his voice was laughable.. he sounded like a constipated chain-smoker. Heath Ledger was above average as The Joker, but what was the deal with his having no origin? Was this movie supposed to be based on the animated series and not the comic book?

While the only other batman I've seen is Batman and Robin, Christian Bale was waaaaay better than the pretty boy in that movie. At least Christian Bale can act. And I liked his voice.

Darth Vader was the best villain because he didn't have an origin story. Then they went and made one, and Joker has replaced him on my list for coolest villain.

Quote
Unfortunately, there will undoubtedly be another sequel and the public will eat it up no matter how disgusting the film is. Me? I'd much rather have those campy Schumacher versions. At least they weren't overrated, terrible as they may have been.

I went into this movie with the highest expectations I've ever had with a movie, and I was completely blown away. Sure it wasn't perfect, but it didn't disappoint. I'm completely floored at the quality of work the Nolan brothers keep putting out there. I'm awaiting their next movie, be it batman or not, with great anticipation.

But hey, if you felt that way more power to you, I just think that is a little extreme. Maybe you and Dok should hang out.  :-\
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: dignan on July 28, 2008, 08:59:38 PM
Let's just move it along, people...don't let this happen to you:

[yt=425,350]bUQfHRfX2o8[/yt]
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on July 28, 2008, 09:22:54 PM
You can always tell when someone ONLY hates something because everyone likes it.  You can say "I didn't enjoy this film" and be fine, but to call it a terrible movie?  That's just not true no matter how you slice it.  Even if you hated it, you can still recognize it as at least decent.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Wheaty Petestraw on July 28, 2008, 09:41:51 PM
You can always tell when someone ONLY hates something because everyone likes it.  You can say "I didn't enjoy this film" and be fine, but to call it a terrible movie?  That's just not true no matter how you slice it.  Even if you hated it, you can still recognize it as at least decent.

Incorrect. I went into the movie really wanting to like it and only came out majorly disappointed. That's like saying I don't like Britney Spears because she's sold millions of records, when in all actuality, I just dislike her.. um.. music, if that's what you want to call it. Even if I went into the theater with NO expectations, I still would have been disappointed. I mean, come on... a trace on cell phones that allows Batman to see through echoes? That's just silly. Like I said before, I would much rather watch the campy Schumacher versions of Batman. At least those don't take themselves seriously. Are you guys really telling me that aside from Ledger's performance, you actually found the movie to be good? Here's to hoping that there's a Rifftrax for The Dark Knight.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on July 28, 2008, 09:43:32 PM
You can always tell when someone ONLY hates something because everyone likes it.  You can say "I didn't enjoy this film" and be fine, but to call it a terrible movie?  That's just not true no matter how you slice it.  Even if you hated it, you can still recognize it as at least decent.

No, Ingrown Asshair just likes being negative about everything. I'd be surprised to find something that he DOESN'T hate.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: torgosPizza on July 28, 2008, 11:36:52 PM
I would much rather watch the campy Schumacher versions of Batman.

No offense, but that's retarded. They are not "campy," they are garbage.

You can always tell when someone ONLY hates something because everyone likes it.  You can say "I didn't enjoy this film" and be fine, but to call it a terrible movie?  That's just not true no matter how you slice it.  Even if you hated it, you can still recognize it as at least decent.

No, Ingrown Asshair just likes being negative about everything. I'd be surprised to find something that he DOESN'T hate.

Maybe Ingrown Asshair and Doktor Sleepless are the same person? Same number of syllables (and words) in their names. Hmm..
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Ortega on July 29, 2008, 12:47:58 AM
(http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q80/paranoia2K/trollingxp3.jpg)

Don't you guys remember rule # 2687 of the internet ?.......Don't feed the troll
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: dignan on July 29, 2008, 06:18:08 AM
(http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q80/paranoia2K/trollingxp3.jpg)

Don't you guys remember rule # 2687 of the internet ?.......Don't feed the troll

Is he holding a gourd?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 29, 2008, 06:22:53 AM
And a feather duster for some reason.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 29, 2008, 06:26:49 AM
And shish-kabob things for teeth?? :scared:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: dignan on July 29, 2008, 06:43:59 AM
And a feather duster for some reason.

You know, my opinion of trolls has improved substantially as a direct result of seeing this picture.  They don't want to eat our children!  They just want to tend to the land and raise gourds, and occasionally do a bit of light dusting. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on July 29, 2008, 06:57:34 AM
(http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q80/paranoia2K/trollingxp3.jpg)

Don't you guys remember rule # 2687 of the internet ?.......Don't feed the troll

Is he holding a gourd?

If he's holding a gourd, I have this inexplicable need to follow said gourd.

And PS, you're not supposed to say

Incorrect.

You're supposed to say WRONG.  Have you learned nothing from this forum?  SELLOUT.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: stansimpson on July 29, 2008, 07:45:03 AM
For those not picking up on the play-on words here, Ingrown Asshair likes being a pain in the butt.

Don't follow the gourd.  The SHOE is the sign!  Let us, like Him, hold up one shoe and let the other be upon our foot, for this is His sign, that all who follow Him shall do likewise.  Give me your shoe!!!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Compound on July 29, 2008, 09:33:54 AM
Dignan, Tripe, RVR?

My name's Compound. I'm with the Geek Patrol.

I'm afraid that I'm going to have to ask you to go stand in the Geek Corner of Shame (TM) for not knowing where the troll picture came from. While there, the rest of us will point and laugh at you. You are free to use this public scorn as an excuse to later become a masked vigilante if you so desire.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 29, 2008, 09:38:13 AM
Don't know, don't care, did like the feather duster though (nothing cleans quite as well as a good feather duster)  :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 29, 2008, 09:39:50 AM
I can't believe that in this thread and the Batman Forever thread I am running into fans of the Joel Shoemaker movies.

I have never met anyone who liked those movies.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Nick on July 29, 2008, 09:48:05 AM
Yeah, I can respect that someone might not like The Dark Knight, but think it's worse than the Shumacher films? That's just plain ridiculous.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 29, 2008, 09:50:11 AM
I have met someone who think Batman Forever is better than Batman?!

No kidding.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on July 29, 2008, 09:50:40 AM
You can always tell when someone ONLY hates something because everyone likes it.  You can say "I didn't enjoy this film" and be fine, but to call it a terrible movie?  That's just not true no matter how you slice it.  Even if you hated it, you can still recognize it as at least decent.

No, Ingrown Asshair just likes being negative about everything. I'd be surprised to find something that he DOESN'T hate.

Maybe Ingrown Asshair and Doktor Sleepless are the same person? Same number of syllables (and words) in their names. Hmm..

Hey no pulling an insulterkiller, you aren't allowed to bring in reinforcements that are just you in disguise! You are a cheater! Ingrown Doktor!

And PS, you're not supposed to say
Incorrect.
You're supposed to say WRONG.  Have you learned nothing from this forum?  SELLOUT.

You can't fault him for being original  :-\


...with saying incorrect, using aliases to back up your opinions has been done.



Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: dignan on July 29, 2008, 10:13:54 AM
Yeah, I'm with Tripe.  Don't know, don't care, I just like gourds.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 29, 2008, 10:21:34 AM
I'm afraid that I'm going to have to ask you to go stand in the Geek Corner of Shame (TM) for not knowing where the troll picture came from. While there, the rest of us will point and laugh at you. You are free to use this public scorn as an excuse to later become a masked vigilante if you so desire.
It's a Guy painted Blue from the Tribal Smurfs to me :D :D

I can't stop laughing :D :D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 29, 2008, 10:59:40 AM
Dignan, Tripe, RVR?

My name's Compound. I'm with the Geek Patrol.

I'm afraid that I'm going to have to ask you to go stand in the Geek Corner of Shame (TM) for not knowing where the troll picture came from. While there, the rest of us will point and laugh at you. You are free to use this public scorn as an excuse to later become a masked vigilante if you so desire.


ooh, you guys got busted by the Geek Patrol, that's like being arrested by a mall security cop
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 29, 2008, 12:03:33 PM
I know where the troll is from... diy.despair.com :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 29, 2008, 12:24:00 PM
I have said multiple times I liked this movie,  Is it as great as everyone says it is? Test of time will tell more than likely and even then it's opinions. There were several things wrong with the film however and seeing as I am able to at least admit  this was a good movie, you all should be able to admit there were several things wrong with the movie.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 29, 2008, 12:32:46 PM
There you go again telling people that they have to think the same way you do.

Noone said you had to like the movie.

I found the movie to be pretty near flawless i think it's the best movie to come out since Lord of the Rings.

You are not our king and you are not better or smarter then the rest of us.

Just because you say something is so doesn't make it so.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 29, 2008, 12:40:34 PM
You strike me as the type of person who would get offended with a hello. I criticize the film while giving it credit, You throw a bitch fit. I mention several times I don't think I am better than you all and that it is opinions, You throw a bitch fit. I say you all should not have to, you throw a bitch fit.

Going on a pattern here, I think there is only one conclussion left, nurse.

Calm down, even when I'm beyond mild people still find a way to get "angry" and "offended".
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: dignan on July 29, 2008, 12:45:40 PM
Very well, I'll admit it was in no way a flawless movie.  A lot of the action scenes, in particular, were filmed and edited in a way that it made it difficult to tell exactly what was going on at any given moment.  The whole bit in the parking garage at the beginning was a little bit confusing and felt a bit like it was tacked on at the last minute.  And the acting of those who were cast as the Gotham City mobsters often felt like they were participating in an entirely different movie, what with their "dese guys ovuh dere" accents.  Those things bothered me.  I'm sure they didn't bother other people.  It's all cool by me, whatever.    
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Ortega on July 29, 2008, 12:48:07 PM
The Main reason people are getting offended and out of shape is that your are incessant in your dislike for the movie.   I mean, if you simply didn't like the movie, you would have posted as such, given your reasons for not liking the movie, and you would have moved on.  But instead you simply repeat the same thing over and over ad nauseam, trying to get a reaction out of people.  That, in and of itself, is the definition of trolling.  You want to have an argument.  What this says about your character is troubling.  Do you have some sort of self-esteem isssue that must be satiated by "winning" arguments about trivial subjects like movies?  You've said your piece, now let's move on.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doktor Sleepless on July 29, 2008, 12:55:31 PM
The Main reason people are getting offended and out of shape is that your are incessant in your dislike for the movie.   I mean, if you simply didn't like the movie, you would have posted as such, given your reasons for not liking the movie, and you would have moved on.  But instead you simply repeat the same thing over and over ad nauseam, trying to get a reaction out of people.  That, in and of itself, is the definition of trolling.  You want to have an argument.  What this says about your character is troubling.  Do you have some sort of self-esteem isssue that must be satiated by "winning" arguments about trivial subjects like movies?  You've said your piece, now let's move on.

Originally I did say my piece. I said I didn't like the movie, gave my reasons. Then was attacked for it. Several times. I even went as far as ignoring this thread for the better part of it, only to have people still attacck me for my opinion. Even now, I onlly said what I said because I was brought up as being the same person as Ingrown.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Ortega on July 29, 2008, 01:06:37 PM
Yes, i'm sorry that you've been attacked for your opinions.  BUt continuing to sulk in the corner, throwing peices of food at the tables insn't going to prove anything.  IF you were a bit more congenial in your disagreements, then maybe there would have been such a scuffle.  But simply proporting your subjective view as the only valid one is not a way go about it.  From what i've seen, you took issue during the Movie Poll, where you waere apprently upset about Batman Begins winning the poll.  And you employed the same tactics as you've used here, taking issue with any positive post and any in direct opposition to yours. So then you took the fight into THIS thread.  So people were already on the offensive.  So might i suggest this bit of advice, drop it.  Say in driect terms, why you like the mmvoe or dislike it.  Then please, fucking drop it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 29, 2008, 03:57:27 PM
Oh man, did you fall off your cross again Dr. ?  Well .... let's get you back up there.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 29, 2008, 04:59:00 PM
(http://www.gapingvoid.com/11444661477-thumb.jpg)

Time to move on people.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 29, 2008, 07:22:10 PM
(http://www.gapingvoid.com/11444661477-thumb.jpg)

Time to move on people.

Wait 6 billion, that still leaves way too many that care.

Table 094. Midyear Population, by Age and Sex
---------------- --------------- -------------- -------------- ----------- -------- -------- ------
Country or area/                                                                                   
Year/                 Population     Population     Population     Percent  Percent  Percent    Sex
Age                   both sexes           male         female  both sexes     male   female  ratio
---------------- --------------- -------------- -------------- ----------- -------- -------- ------

WORLD/2008

Total, all ages    6,706,992,932  3,376,791,855  3,330,201,077       100.0    100.0    100.0  101.4
 
---------------- --------------- -------------- -------------- ----------- -------- -------- ------
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, International Data Base.

That's 706,992,932 people who care!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 29, 2008, 07:23:22 PM
Uh huh.. Yeah.. ::)

They didn't participate :-X
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 29, 2008, 07:26:00 PM
Yes.  The poll numbers were:

6,000,000,000-don't care
706,992,932-abstaining

Granted there was a 1% margin of error, so take it with a grain of salt.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on July 29, 2008, 07:27:34 PM
There! Ya'see?? :o
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 29, 2008, 07:28:48 PM
I demand a recount.....hanging chads....blah.....get off my lawn!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 29, 2008, 07:43:59 PM
Does anyone know what the budget for the Dark Knight was compared to Batman begins?

It sure looks like it cost a lot more to make.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Wheaty Petestraw on July 29, 2008, 07:46:30 PM
(http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q80/paranoia2K/trollingxp3.jpg)

Don't you guys remember rule # 2687 of the internet ?.......Don't feed the troll

That's the most ridiculous cop-out the internet has ever known. The instant someone disagrees with the opinion of the masses, it's trolling. Did you ever stop to consider that people have differing opinions? A couple years down the road when all the excitement about Ledger's death dies down, there will be less people inclined to give this movie a rating higher than 80%. Remember, when Star Wars episode I came out, there were shitloads of fanboys proclaiming it to be TEH GRAYTIST MOOVEE EVAR MAID!!!!!

I really hope you people come to your senses, and soon. There is no way this movie belongs in the top 250 at imdb.com, let alone the #1 spot. Was Ledger's performance good? Yes. Was it worthy of an oscar? Ummm... no. My favorite part, however, is how so many people claim this movie needed to be long for character development.. wait, WHAT? The Joker shows up, robs a mob bank and has his goons kill each other off. It was completely predictable that HE was the one wearing the clown mask who said that he was supposed to kill the bus driver, before the bus backed in and crushed the other guy.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: gbeenie on July 29, 2008, 07:47:36 PM
I think he has taken Issac's place as biggest jerk on the internet.

I was NEVER a jerk.

I'm not crazy... I'm not...

(http://www.comicbookmovie.com/images/news/batman-the-dark-knight/Heath%20Ledger%20as%20The%20Joker.jpg)

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Wheaty Petestraw on July 29, 2008, 07:49:14 PM
The Main reason people are getting offended and out of shape is that your are incessant in your dislike for the movie.   I mean, if you simply didn't like the movie, you would have posted as such, given your reasons for not liking the movie, and you would have moved on.  But instead you simply repeat the same thing over and over ad nauseam, trying to get a reaction out of people.  That, in and of itself, is the definition of trolling.  You want to have an argument.  What this says about your character is troubling.  Do you have some sort of self-esteem isssue that must be satiated by "winning" arguments about trivial subjects like movies?  You've said your piece, now let's move on.

Could the same not be said for you and everyone else trying to "win" this argument of opinions? Remember, when you're pointing your finger at someone, three more are pointing back at you.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on July 29, 2008, 07:50:26 PM
The Main reason people are getting offended and out of shape is that your are incessant in your dislike for the movie.   I mean, if you simply didn't like the movie, you would have posted as such, given your reasons for not liking the movie, and you would have moved on.  But instead you simply repeat the same thing over and over ad nauseam, trying to get a reaction out of people.  That, in and of itself, is the definition of trolling.  You want to have an argument.  What this says about your character is troubling.  Do you have some sort of self-esteem isssue that must be satiated by "winning" arguments about trivial subjects like movies?  You've said your piece, now let's move on.

Could the same not be said for you and everyone else trying to "win" this argument of opinions? Remember, when you're pointing your finger at someone, three more are pointing back at you.

What if....you are a farmer who caught his other 3 fingers in a thresher, but the index finger was saved?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Wheaty Petestraw on July 29, 2008, 07:57:38 PM
The Main reason people are getting offended and out of shape is that your are incessant in your dislike for the movie.   I mean, if you simply didn't like the movie, you would have posted as such, given your reasons for not liking the movie, and you would have moved on.  But instead you simply repeat the same thing over and over ad nauseam, trying to get a reaction out of people.  That, in and of itself, is the definition of trolling.  You want to have an argument.  What this says about your character is troubling.  Do you have some sort of self-esteem isssue that must be satiated by "winning" arguments about trivial subjects like movies?  You've said your piece, now let's move on.

Could the same not be said for you and everyone else trying to "win" this argument of opinions? Remember, when you're pointing your finger at someone, three more are pointing back at you.

What if....you are a farmer who caught his other 3 fingers in a thresher, but the index finger was saved?

"What if" is a situation for comic book nerds and... oh... *slowly backs out of thread*
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Ortega on July 29, 2008, 08:06:56 PM
FYI, those words were not directed at you Asshair.  I understand why you would be distressed when something is in your face that everyone praises, yet you find average at best.  I was referring to Doctor Sleepless, who has been droning on ad nasueam since July 18. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 29, 2008, 08:18:25 PM
Yeah i don't mind if someone likes Batman Forever more then TDK,now may not understand it and I may say so but it doesn't bother me.

What bothers me about Doctor Sleepless is that he keeps acting like we are attacking him personally whenever we point out something we like about the movie.

Also the way he through a tantrum when we wouldn't say we hated the movie by turning around and saying that he liked it and since he had said that we now HAD to say we didn't like it.

I for one was not trying to force him to like the movie i was just trying to talk about what I liked about it and find out what he didn't like about it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 29, 2008, 09:08:20 PM
Well, maybe I just don't think everyone feels the need to make a political statement in everything, and I don't feel the need to look for political statements in every movie I see.  Sometimes I just want to enjoy movies for what they are on the surface, and not think too hard about the "deeper meaning" of every line of dialogue or every image.  My point is that you can find anything you want to in a movie if you look hard enough.  Take of a movie like "Shaun of the Dead".  You could say it comments on how fickle people are, and how easily people abandon their moral standards when faced with adversity, and how stubbornly we revert to the status quo once an adverse situation is under control, or you could say it's just a really funny and all-around well-crafted zombie movie.  Which one is closer to how its creators intended it?  My money is that it's probably closer to the second one than the first.  But that's just my opinion.

Sure, if you look hard enough you can find parallels to politics in a lot of things.  However, you can also look at Animal Farm as a cute little story about talking pigs.  But if you do, you are missing a big part of the story.  

I've never heard your argument before.  And i'm pretty surprised actually.  I could possibly understand how you would be annoyed with people who try and make you think about a film if you just want to enjoy it... like if a teacher was making you write a paper about it.  The thing is... no one is forcing you to think about it.  And it seems to me that you are demanding less for your money.  It's like you are complaining that your watermelon has all this red squishy stuff beneath the pretty green skin.  It's hard for me to believe that you are actually asking Hollywood to put less into the films they make.  

The point is, I don't really care if you see the political parallels or not.  You don't have to.  Feel free to get as little out of the film as you like.  But why argue against their existence?  For a lot of people, it's a very cool thing that a big blockbuster is politically conscious in an unbiased way.

(Also, in your shaun of the dead example, I don't see how accepting both of your interpretations at the same time wouldn't make it a more timeless and important film.)

EDIT: I'm making it out as if Batman was some huge political allegory.  It's not, the political relevance is just a quick aside.  Sorry for making it out that way.
 

I'm not saying I want less intellectual content out of movies.  Far from it.  I love a movie that makes me have to think about things.  But I would rather see movies that focus on more general, timeless, philosophical content than contemporary issues that people are going to forget about in 20 years.  Which admittedly the Dark Knight does.  The idea of escalation is something that people will probably have to consider for a long time.

I will say, though, that I don't want every movie I see to give me something to think about.  And a movie doesn't have to be deep for me to enjoy it.  One of my favorite movies of all time is Camp Nowhere.  I don't think anyone would accuse that movie of being deep.  But it's fun.  To put it in food terms, I like filet mignon, but I don't want to have it for every meal.  Sometimes I just want some Burger King.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Dim of the Yard on July 29, 2008, 09:43:49 PM
While we're complaining about stuff that we don't like, I'm going to take a moment and whine about the sonar bits of the movie.  Not that it's highly unlikely.  Oh, no.  I'm complaining mostly about the fact that it was fairly hurty on the eyes.  The first time I saw the movie, I was about 20 feet from the screen, due to the fact I got to the theater late and all of the good seats were taken up.  So whenever the bits with the sonar popped up, I was outright miserable.  The second time I saw it, this time with family, we were 3/4 of the way in the back of the theater, and I was still hurting every time the sonar came into use.  I had to shut my eyes each time the damn thing came up on screen and either judge from the SWOOSH-ing noises whether the sonar was done or not, or I had to have my boyfriend poke me a couple of times.

Why so serious about sonar?  Because I get migraines.  Those are not fun in the least, believe you me.  I would not have been happy if Dark Knight gave me a migraine, which thankfully, it didn't.  I stopped watching the Harry Potter movies because Prisoner of Azkaban gave me a vicious migraine (the Patronus was the trigger.  Maybe I'm a Dementor?), and I would have had no problems staying away from Dark Knight if it had given me a migraine, too.  Physical health kind of takes priority over a summer blockbuster.

But I still thought the movie was awesome.  I thought Harvey Dent was the best part of the movie, so, as odd as it sounds, I'm apathetic as to whether or not Heath Ledger gets the Oscar for his performance as the Joker.  *shrug*

There.  I got an early start on this thread's daily dose of drama.   ;D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Variety of Cells on July 29, 2008, 10:04:15 PM
I'm not saying I want less intellectual content out of movies.  Far from it.  I love a movie that makes me have to think about things.  But I would rather see movies that focus on more general, timeless, philosophical content than contemporary issues that people are going to forget about in 20 years.  Which admittedly the Dark Knight does.  The idea of escalation is something that people will probably have to consider for a long time.

I will say, though, that I don't want every movie I see to give me something to think about.  And a movie doesn't have to be deep for me to enjoy it.  One of my favorite movies of all time is Camp Nowhere.  I don't think anyone would accuse that movie of being deep.  But it's fun.  To put it in food terms, I like filet mignon, but I don't want to have it for every meal.  Sometimes I just want some Burger King.

Annnnd debate closed.  Finally we both have given in enough to where our different positions are not mutually exclusive.  *shakes your hand* It's been a pleasure arguing with you. 

Also, some one asked about budget.  The estimated budgets from IMDB are as follows

Begins: $150,000,000
Dark Knight: $180,000,000

Which is strange considering a comment that the cinematographer made in an article which stated that the budget was 3 times as much as it would have been if it were all shot on 35 instead of portions being shot in 70mm.  But that means the budget would have only been 60,000,000 dollars.  So either some one is exaggerating, or those numbers are incorrect.  Or he could have just been referring to the technical portion of the budget, and not the above the line portion.  I'm going to guess it was probably the latter. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 30, 2008, 06:56:31 AM
Thanks for the info.

that is very interesting.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 30, 2008, 01:43:58 PM
2. Hopefully Robin doesn't show up at all, I find him lame IMO.

Christian Bale has been quoted in saying that he won't do any batmans that have Robin in them. I just can't find the quote.

I believe what he said was if they did a movie with Robin they'll be doing it without Batman, because he'll have chained himself to a radiator in protest.  Something along those lines anyway.

it took me forever to find this, but I knew I posted it before

all I know is, if Casey Kasem isn't Robin in the next one, I'm never seeing another Batman movie again!!

oh, nevermind

Quote
"The Dark Knight" will be appearing in theaters on July 18th and while director Christopher Nolan has yet to confirm a third film, we have heard several times from Christian Bale that the Batman re-do will be a trilogy.

It seems that the third installment will bring back Two-Face, in addition to other villains. But will Batman be able to handle such deadly foes, or will he need the help from a caped crusader, Robin?

Luckily, Bale understands that introducing the lame sidekick in these amazing films is ludicrous and just in case Robin is ever given a chance to fight crime, he will have to do it alone, since Batman will be on strike.

"If Robin crops up in one of the new Batman films, I'll be chaining myself up somewhere and refusing to go to work," Bale told StarPulse. And we thank you.


Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: MontyServo on July 30, 2008, 05:15:53 PM
2. Hopefully Robin doesn't show up at all, I find him lame IMO.

Christian Bale has been quoted in saying that he won't do any batmans that have Robin in them. I just can't find the quote.

I believe what he said was if they did a movie with Robin they'll be doing it without Batman, because he'll have chained himself to a radiator in protest.  Something along those lines anyway.

it took me forever to find this, but I knew I posted it before

all I know is, if Casey Kasem isn't Robin in the next one, I'm never seeing another Batman movie again!!

oh, nevermind

Quote
"The Dark Knight" will be appearing in theaters on July 18th and while director Christopher Nolan has yet to confirm a third film, we have heard several times from Christian Bale that the Batman re-do will be a trilogy.

It seems that the third installment will bring back Two-Face, in addition to other villains. But will Batman be able to handle such deadly foes, or will he need the help from a caped crusader, Robin?

Luckily, Bale understands that introducing the lame sidekick in these amazing films is ludicrous and just in case Robin is ever given a chance to fight crime, he will have to do it alone, since Batman will be on strike.

"If Robin crops up in one of the new Batman films, I'll be chaining myself up somewhere and refusing to go to work," Bale told StarPulse. And we thank you.




Given the job that Nolan has done with the series so far, I'm sure his take on the Robin character would be just as awesome as all the other characters.

Robin is such an important part of the overall Batman mythology that it would be stupid to discount the character just because of some sort of hatred of the Ward/Kasem/or O'Donnell versions.

I'd bet we do see Robin in the third movie.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 30, 2008, 05:18:57 PM
Robin became an important character in that he was an important tool in relating the dark loner character of Batman to younger audiences, which I don't think is necessary in this case.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: MontyServo on July 30, 2008, 05:34:00 PM
Robin became an important character in that he was an important tool in relating the dark loner character of Batman to younger audiences, which I don't think is necessary in this case.

Well, Frank Miller included Robin in Dark Knight Returns.  I doubt it was to appeal to the younger audience.  More likely it was because Robin is an important part of the mythology.

Actually, the teenage female Robin from Dark Knight Returns would be an interesting choice for the next Nolan Batman film.  My point is that it is possible to have Robin in a dark and serious Batman story and have it work.

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 30, 2008, 05:49:00 PM
yeah, but I like Christian Bale as Batman
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 30, 2008, 05:58:49 PM
Robin became an important character in that he was an important tool in relating the dark loner character of Batman to younger audiences, which I don't think is necessary in this case.

Well, Frank Miller included Robin in Dark Knight Returns.  I doubt it was to appeal to the younger audience.  More likely it was because Robin is an important part of the mythology.

Actually, the teenage female Robin from Dark Knight Returns would be an interesting choice for the next Nolan Batman film.  My point is that it is possible to have Robin in a dark and serious Batman story and have it work.



Perhaps its not fair of me to claim that the kid appeal is the only reason for Robin, but I maintain it's the primary one.  There might be a good way to include him in this story, but I would point to the cautionary tale of Jason Todd when considering inserting a Robin in when the audience isn't on board with it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Junkyard on July 30, 2008, 06:08:17 PM
Ehh. Robin's a hard one to buy. He just doesn't fit into the movie setting, no matter how far you stretch the concept.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on July 30, 2008, 06:35:33 PM
Ehh. Robin's a hard one to buy. He just doesn't fit into the movie setting, no matter how far you stretch the concept.

They could do a small comic relief moment in the next one, kind of like in Casino Royale, where the bar tender asks Bond if he likes his martini shaken or stirred, and Bond replied, "do I look like I care?"

So they could do kind of like the beginning of the Dark Knight where Batman saves this guy trying to help him out, and as Batman is leaving the guy could be like, "hey thanks for saving me, my name is Robin." and then Batman can look at him with contempt and say, "Go home Robin"
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on July 30, 2008, 07:44:51 PM
Quote
Angelina Jolie (Wanted) has apparently made inquiries with movie executives about stepping into the role of Catwoman in the sequel to "The Dark Knight." Although nothing has been confirmed, Jolie already has the thumbs up from former Catwoman actress Julie Newmar, who told the New York Daily News: "Angelina would own the part."

Julie, 74, who played the feline villain in the 1960s Batman TV series, added: "My industry friends tell me [she] has made inquiries about the role. I can understand how it would pique her interest. Catwoman is Batman's one true love. She's tremendously popular with women because she's both a heroine and a villainess. When you look at the staggering box office of this current film, which actress wouldn't want to jump in?"

Big names in Hollywood have recently been eager to star in a comic book movie, but as with all rumors, we will have to wait and see. There is still no word that Catwoman would even appear in the third Christopher Nolan-directed Batman film. There is even no word on whether the film will be made at all. Stay tuned.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 30, 2008, 07:47:39 PM
Do they really think that even if they have to get another director Warners isn't going to want to try and cash in on how well TDK has done?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on July 30, 2008, 07:48:13 PM
It would really bother me if Angelina was in it.  She's not known for her acting by any stretch of the imagination and what's been great about these Nolan movies is that they've been real films.  Axing Katie Holmes for a real actress ensured the entire TDK cast was made up of truly talented people at the top of their game.  St. Angie can't cut it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 30, 2008, 08:08:38 PM
I would never pay money to see a Batman movie with Jolie in it. She's a fucking hack.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on July 30, 2008, 08:55:03 PM
She's a fucking hack.

That's essentially what I was trying to say, but sometimes I get called out for being slightly ranty-bitchy, so I thought I'd try the calm explanation look on for size.   ;)

But yeah, she's a fucking hack. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: pezdrake on July 30, 2008, 08:59:12 PM
I always prefer less superstars in my movies.   Angie is a hottie no doubt but not Catwoman,  How about...

Ellen Page?
Eliza Dushku?

Both can play tough smartasses intelligent enough to challenge Batman.


Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: MontyServo on July 30, 2008, 09:15:49 PM
Actually, the teenage female Robin from Dark Knight Returns would be an interesting choice for the next Nolan Batman film. 

I always prefer less superstars in my movies.   Angie is a hottie no doubt but not Catwoman,  How about...

Ellen Page?

Hmmmm......  I don't see her as Catwoman.  But how about as Robin?  If that was the way they were going to go (with the Dark Knight Returns Robin), I could definitely see Ellen Page in the role.

Catwoman?  How about Marion Cotillard? Cate Blanchett?  Hilary Swank?

I agree about Jolie as Catwoman.  That is the type of stunt casting that killed the 90's Batman movies.  No movie stars need apply, just top drawer actresses please.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on July 30, 2008, 09:17:42 PM
Catwoman?  How about Marion Cotillard?

I could get behind that in a heartbeat.  And actually, if she wasn't already Rachel Dawes, I'd say Maggie G. would be an incredible Catwoman.  I'd also throw Elizabeth Reaser into the mix.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on July 30, 2008, 11:56:48 PM
I dunno.  I'm not sure Catwoman would work in the Nolan Batman series.  Maybe if she was really close to how she was portrayed in Batman: Year One. 

I personally would love to see Harvey Bullock and Renee Montoya in the next one.  I think they, out of all the Batman characters, would work really well in the Nolan movies.  Here's how I see it: Gordon, needing to keep up the appearance of hunting down Batman following his being accused of the crimes actually committed by Harvey Dent, decides to form a special unit dedicated to bringing Batman to justice, and puts at its head Sergeant Harvey Bullock, who recently trasferred to Gotham from Chicago.  Bullock, a 15 year veteran, is teamed up with rookie Detective Renee Montoya, who was promoted to Detective a couple of months earlier.  Bullock takes his job of hunting down the Batman very seriously, almost too seriously, while the idealistic Montoya is convinced of his innocence.  What do you think?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on July 31, 2008, 12:28:34 AM
Jolie would be a terrible choice.  Too much star power and it would just be her in skin-tight clothes.  Eliza Dushku would be great, though.  She can act, she has already proven herself in the bad girl role, and she's the right age range.  Ellen Page I don't really see fitting the role.  But I personally hope the next movie centers around Riddler.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 31, 2008, 04:50:27 AM
Yeah, personally I would love to see Nolan's take on the Riddler. He would be very dark and sinister. I see him playing out like the highly intelligent, computer hacking Riddler from BTAS, but much more violent and dark. That would be a great show.

It's a shame that most of the Batman villains who are "cool" have already been horribly butchered by the original round of Batman movies, because now thinking about them being in these movies makes me nervous - not because I don't think Nolan can pull them off or because the villains now have a kind of a stain to them (although they do!), but more because I don't want it to feel like there's noone else to choose from.

I'd like to see how Nolan deals with some of the more obscure villains, or some of the really outrageous ones. Now that CGI is easily available in high quality, I think a Clayface would be awesome, if done right. Although now that I say that, some people might not like it because he's a little like Sandman. I'd hate for people to draw comparisons to THOSE stinking pile of movies. The Mad Hatter, Firefly, or Scarface would also be cool. Or if they wanted to go another angle, bringing The Reaper back would be really awesome (if Nolan was willing to live "outside" of the accepted storyline from the comics). Maybe Batman could "redeem" himself with the city by hunting down and stopping the even more violent vigilante.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: pezdrake on July 31, 2008, 05:52:13 AM
Yeah, personally I would love to see Nolan's take on the Riddler. He would be very dark and sinister.

Agreed.  Nolan could make him more along the lines of serial killers or criminals like BTK or the Zodiac Killer in his leaving of notes and clues for investigators and Batman.   (but not quite as brutally bloodthirsty as either of those serial killers)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 31, 2008, 06:00:33 AM
No damn Catwoamn damnit.

Sorry I just think she's a terrible choice of a character no mater who plays her, especially since there are better female characters in the Batman universe.

Yeah, personally I would love to see Nolan's take on the Riddler. He would be very dark and sinister.
Agreed.  Nolan could make him more along the lines of serial killers or criminals like BTK or the Zodiac Killer in his leaving of notes and clues for investigators and Batman.   (but not quite as brutally bloodthirsty as either of those serial killers)

Seconded, er thirded, that's exactly how i imagined The Riddler in Nolan's Gotham.

Actually though instead of Depp, I was thinking of again going with somebody from the Commonwealth, somebody who might have Courtney first in line for tickets.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on July 31, 2008, 06:06:05 AM
I saw the Batman special they recently played on the History channel, and one of the things that really made me think was, in fact, drawing comparisons between the Riddler and Ted Bundy.  The incurable narcissist that NEEDS to leave evidence behind craving the attention and acknowledgment for his crimes.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on July 31, 2008, 06:53:50 AM
Actually though instead of Depp, I was thinking of again going with somebody from the Commonwealth, somebody who might have Courtney first in line for tickets.

Tennant is reportedly being considered.  I'd camp out.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 31, 2008, 06:57:58 AM
Actually though instead of Depp, I was thinking of again going with somebody from the Commonwealth, somebody who might have Courtney first in line for tickets.
Tennant is reportedly being considered.  I'd camp out.

Get out! I just came up with that myself during the credits, did I absorb it via osmosis or something?

I think he'd be ace, he's actually quite good at evil :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 31, 2008, 07:06:11 AM
I think the Riddler may be a little too much like the Joker to be used in the very next movie,I think people would compare whoever plays him unfairly to Ledger.

I like the idea of Scarface.

Just think how scary a Nolan version of him could be.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 31, 2008, 07:24:48 AM
Now we just need to figure out a nerdy, grey-haired, balding effeminate loser to play the ventriloquist. Thoughts?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on July 31, 2008, 07:35:34 AM
HHmm that is tough one.

Maybe  David Tennant in a bald cap?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: James of LinHood on July 31, 2008, 07:45:08 AM
Jason Alexander IS The Ventriloquist!

(http://images.eonline.com/eol_images/Profiles/20061011/244.alexander.jason.101006.jpg)

 :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Dim of the Yard on July 31, 2008, 07:45:29 AM
No!  Me!  I'll do it!  Prosthetics, make-up, and CGI worked well for Aaron Eckhart, so why can't it make me look grey-haired, balding, and slightly male?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on July 31, 2008, 10:14:59 AM
Actually, I always thought in keeping with the theme of the ventriloquist being a complete non-entity as far as Scarface was concerned, it would be better to get some complete nobody to play him.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: dignan on July 31, 2008, 12:51:46 PM
You know, some of the Batman villains are really damn goofy. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on July 31, 2008, 12:54:47 PM
Yep some of them verge on Dick Tracy territory, but many, even those who seem a tad cartoonish, have potential to be.presented seriously.

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 31, 2008, 01:04:56 PM
Catwoman?  How about Marion Cotillard?

I could get behind that in a heartbeat.  And actually, if she wasn't already Rachel Dawes, I'd say Maggie G. would be an incredible Catwoman.  I'd also throw Elizabeth Reaser into the mix.

I do adore Marion, but I have to say, I think one of the reasons why both Batman movies are so good, is that there IS NO "sexy lady" part.

Now, I'm a feminist, but movie formula dictates that   "trashy sexy lady" = potential for "crap film"

I don't think Nolan NEEDS a female villain - and I'm pretty sure he said he won't ever do Robin, Penguin or Catwoman.  I'll find the source, but I know I just read it on Cinema Blend.com

But just as a side note, I'm hoping they don't do a 3rd one  :-[
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: pezdrake on July 31, 2008, 01:16:51 PM

[/quote]

I do adore Marion, but I have to say, I think one of the reasons why both Batman movies are so good, is that there IS NO "sexy lady" part.

Now, I'm a feminist, but movie formula dictates that   "trashy sexy lady" = potential for "crap film"

I don't think Nolan NEEDS a female villain - and I'm pretty sure he said he won't ever do Robin, Penguin or Catwoman.  I'll find the source, but I know I just read it on Cinema Blend.com

But just as a side note, I'm hoping they don't do a 3rd one  :-[
[/quote]

I agree that a love interest is completely unnecessary for a Batman movie.  That has completely screwed up past Batman movies.  I mean, Vicki Vale?  Come on.  I was glad they didn't really play up that part too much in TDK.  It was more interesting to see romance between Harvey and Rachel than Bruce and Rachel.  But with Catwoman it's not so much romance as flirtation.  It might be better as a Miller CAtwoman where she's a sex worker turned Robin Hood like superhero.  THat being said, I won't be upset if we never see Catwoman in the new movies. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on July 31, 2008, 01:20:15 PM
THat being said, I won't be upset if we never see Catwoman in the new movies. 

I agree!   

I also agree about the romance between Harvey and Rachel - it was so much more genuine and sweet than with Bruce and Rachel.  I mean, they didn't even really like each other that much in the first one, haha ;)

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on August 01, 2008, 02:51:05 PM
Quote
As with any popular movie, sequel talks begin immediately after the film's theatrical release. "The Dark Knight" is no different.

Director Christopher Nolan has yet to confirm a third movie in his Batman series, but internet rumors are already out of control. It was recently reported that Angelina Jolie has been talking to studio executives about taking the role of Catwoman in the sequel to "The Dark Knight."

Now, UK's Daily Telegraph has quoted their unnamed source who said that Warner Bros is targeting Johnny Depp to play The Riddler and Philip Seymour Hoffman to take the role of The Penguin.

"Producers are convinced that the role of The Riddler is perfect for Depp. Johnny's a pro. He'll be able to take direction and still make the character his own," said the source. "And what better Penguin is there than Philip Seymour Hoffman?"

There is no guarantee that any of these characters will make it into the third film, but I believe The Riddler seems like a perfect fit into the dark, reality-based storyline. The Penguin... not so much.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Nick on August 01, 2008, 03:26:15 PM
I'm pretty sure Nolan said somewhere he wasn't doing the Penguin.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 01, 2008, 03:30:54 PM
Yeah he said he would be more keen on the fact the movie had Philip Seymour Hoffman than that the movie had the Penguin.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on August 01, 2008, 04:20:20 PM
How about Rupert Thorne?  Maybe not as the main villain, but as a villain?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 01, 2008, 04:20:58 PM
Just in general or for PSH?

Because for the latter I could sort of see that. I think the idea with having him as The Penguin was for The Penguin to be the second string villain.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: gbeenie on August 02, 2008, 09:37:47 AM
How about Rupert Thorne?  Maybe not as the main villain, but as a villain?

I would see that more as one of those name-dropping things that Nolan and Goyer did A LOT of in Batman Begins (and a little in TDK).
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on August 02, 2008, 11:47:35 AM
I'm really really really REEEEAAAAALLLLY hoping that the studio doesn't make Nolan make a third  "just because fans want one". 


If anyone could break the "third time's a BOMB" [in terms of sequels] then it could be Nolan.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: gbeenie on August 02, 2008, 12:19:11 PM
Agreed. Nolan should only do a third one if he really wants to (I think, at this point, that it's safe to trust the guy's judgment).
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on August 02, 2008, 12:20:18 PM
I'm pretty sure they signed for third one...don't quote me on that.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on August 02, 2008, 12:56:44 PM
yeah, it was always going to be a trilogy
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck on August 02, 2008, 01:25:31 PM
I'm sure I'll be laughed out of the thread for this but this old villian looks interesting....

Quote
The Monk: First appearing in Detective Comics #31 (September 1939), the Monk is one of the earliest Batman villains. He wore a red, monk like outfit, with a hood that bore a skull and crossbones on it. The Monk turned out to be a vampire, and was killed after being shot with a silver bullet. His battle with Batman was one of the first multi-part Batman adventures. The Monk's hood has been in a glass display case in the Batcave ever since, in all subsequent official continuities.

They don't always have to be well known to be entertaining.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on August 02, 2008, 01:54:43 PM
Andy sold a Monk vs. Batman plot to DC in 2002.  I think Matt Wagner picked up the project and did a graphic novel about it. 
Blast you, Wagner!  *shakes fist*
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on August 02, 2008, 02:09:54 PM
(http://www.superherostuff.com/OtherItems/comics/images/batman_aliens_ii_trade2.jpg)

 ;D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tyrant on August 02, 2008, 02:43:00 PM
(http://www.superherostuff.com/OtherItems/comics/images/batman_aliens_ii_trade2.jpg)

 ;D


  And a tearful and heartbroken (hopefully) Pak will announce to this forum that I have shed the mortal coil of this world upon viewing, for my head will have exploded right after the movie from too much awesomeness. A few days later, it will be all over the Internet news and will go down in history as the first time a movie ever killed a nerd because it was far too cool.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: gbeenie on August 02, 2008, 03:05:41 PM
Psst! 
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: jasimon1 on August 02, 2008, 03:17:18 PM
So I know we talked about this awhile ago but there was an article in todays Chicago Tribune with all the filming locations addresses. Apparently the hospital that was blown up was in Chicago. It wasn't a hospital though. It was the old Brach's Candy Factory on the Northside that has been empty for years.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on August 02, 2008, 03:19:02 PM
So I know we talked about this awhile ago but there was an article in todays Chicago Tribune with all the filming locations addresses. Apparently the hospital that was blown up was in Chicago. It wasn't a hospital though. It was the old Brach's Candy Factory on the Northside that has been empty for years.

Hmm, interesting.  They dressed and cleaned it up very well, It definitely looked hospitally.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: ninjacat11 on August 02, 2008, 03:21:11 PM
It's incredibly unlikely, but I recommend that Joe Pesci be cast as The Penguin.

That would be so hardcore.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: mearnest on August 02, 2008, 06:35:24 PM
Joe Pesci has been my first choice for Penguin for years.  In my mind Penguin isn't a freak, he's just short and strong as hell .  Penguin should be scary, but in a gangster way.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on August 02, 2008, 06:44:16 PM
Joe Pesci has been my first choice for Penguin for years.  In my mind Penguin isn't a freak, he's just short and strong as hell .  Penguin should be scary, but in a gangster way.

Agreed, my favorite depictions of the Penguin are always the ones where he tries to present himself as a proper gentlemen that has "gone straight" after his shady past, no matter how many crooked deals he has going on under the table.  He was one of the few villains I liked better after the Batman Animated Series went through it's redesign at the end of its run (Scarecrow also comes to mind there.)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: pezdrake on August 04, 2008, 07:52:27 AM
Saw TDK again yesterday.  One thing had occurred to me: Crispin Glover would make a great Riddler.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 04, 2008, 08:46:53 AM
The ONLY thing about this movie that really bugs me at this point is that party scene. What the hell happened after Batman and Rachel went out the window? The scene just ENDS and it doesn't make any sense. I watched it more carefully on second viewing, and it really is pretty much dropped with no explanation whatsoever. It's irritating.

Other than that, I was just as much on the edge of my seat this time through as I was the first, even though I knew exactly what was going to happen. Fantastic movie.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 04, 2008, 08:55:24 AM
The Joker said that at that point he thought Dent and Batman were the same person so I guess he left after he thought he had gotten them both.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck on August 04, 2008, 09:08:34 AM
Saw TDK again yesterday.  One thing had occurred to me: Crispin Glover would make a great Riddler.

I can't argue with that at all.   :)

The ONLY thing about this movie that really bugs me at this point is that party scene. What the hell happened after Batman and Rachel went out the window? The scene just ENDS and it doesn't make any sense. I watched it more carefully on second viewing, and it really is pretty much dropped with no explanation whatsoever. It's irritating.

Yeah....you have a very good point there.  So did Joker just turn and run?  Did he mow everyone in the place down out of frustration? It is amazingly bad story telling in the middle of an otherwise well-written script, isn't it?  It's like it's assumed that the audience's interest is on Batman and only Batman so as long as the story follows him, screw what else is going on.

Guess it's one of those "McGuffins" Hitchcock talked about.

BTW, is it just me or does Nolan seem to be going out of his way to avoid any acknowledgement of Gordon's daughter (who of course in all other Batman canon becomes Batgirl) in these movies? 
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
  It's like he includes her because he feels he has to but then tries to act like she doesn't exist.  Just because he doesn't want to deal with the Batgirl character doesn't mean he has to deny her existance. 
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on August 04, 2008, 09:11:54 AM
Holy Crap! Is This movie Cursed er something?! :speechless:

From FoxNews
Quote
Morgan Freeman Injured in Car Accident
Monday, August 04, 2008


Morgan Freeman
On Monday, actor Morgan Freeman was injured in a car accident in Mississippi, TMZ.com reported.

The accident occurred around 11:30 p.m. near the small town of Ruleville. Freeman, 71, was airlifted from the scene to a hospital in Memphis, Tenn.

The “Dark Knight” star was accompanied by an unknown female, TMZ reported. Her condition is unknown.

MyFoxMemphis has learned from Freeman's close friend and business partner, Bill Luckett, that he is in "Fair" condition.

Alcohol is not believed to be a factor in the accident.

Freeman is an Academy Award-winning actor, film director and narrator.

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 04, 2008, 09:15:32 AM
BTW, is it just me or does Nolan seem to be going out of his way to avoid any acknowledgement of Gordon's daughter (who of course in all other Batman canon becomes Batgirl) in these movies? 
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
  It's like he includes her because he feels he has to but then tries to act like she doesn't exist.  Just because he doesn't want to deal with the Batgirl character doesn't mean he has to deny her existance. 
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Age wise he's making it difficult for her to ever show up, at least while he's directing. I'd have liked to have seen your version of that scene though :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck on August 04, 2008, 09:27:11 AM
Age wise he's making it difficult for her to ever show up, at least while he's directing. I'd have liked to have seen your version of that scene though :)

My understanding of the age difference in Batman to Batgirl was that she shows up in her early twenties after he's been at this crime-fighting stuff a good while - therefore he'd be in his late thirties at least.

Being that Bruce is supposedly still a young man the girl they have in the movie looks the right age for that scenario.  Since there aren't going to be enough of these movies for Bale & Company to get to that point - and they'd have to go through the whole thing with Robin, etc. - there's no chance of that coming to pass this time....but this did start as a film called Batman Begins.   This was meant to be about a time of origins.  Even if we never see the woman Barbara Gordon (Junior) turns into, show us what could have put her on her path.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: pezdrake on August 04, 2008, 09:27:40 AM
There are a lot of people elsewhere are lobbying for a Johnny Depp Riddler.  I seriously hope that is not going to happen.  I get the feeling he would just end up hamming the part up far too much.  We already had a Jim Carrey Riddler for crying out loud.  
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 04, 2008, 09:29:40 AM
Age wise he's making it difficult for her to ever show up, at least while he's directing. I'd have liked to have seen your version of that scene though :)

My understanding of the age difference in Batman to Batgirl was that she shows up in her early twenties after he's been at this crime-fighting stuff a good while - therefore he'd be in his late thirties at least.

Being that Bruce is supposedly still a young man the girl they have in the movie looks the right age for that scenario.  Since there aren't going to be enough of these movies for Bale & Company to get to that point - and they'd have to go through the whole thing with Robin, etc. - there's no chance of that coming to pass this time....but this did start as a film called Batman Begins.   This was meant to be about a time of origins.  Even if we never see the woman Barbara Gordon (Junior) turns into, show us what could have put her on her path.

Oh yes I agree there, that would be great, and it was mostly thinking about how little she is rather than how old Bale might end up beingt :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck on August 04, 2008, 10:15:47 AM
There are a lot of people elsewhere are lobbying for a Johnny Depp Riddler.

I read that and all I can see is Jack Sparrow and Ed Wood....I know it's not fair but it's the truth.

And now I'm looking at Depp's imdb listing and he's rumored to be in a Tim Burton film of the TV soap Dark Shadows movie playing Barnabas Collins?!?!?!?!

Holy shit!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Cosmic Muse on August 04, 2008, 10:27:53 AM
To paraphrase a quote from another DC character based movie, in response to The dark Knight dominating the Box off for a Third week, I never thought this would go the distance. I mean really, third week in and this movie is still going strong. It's totally blowing away last years alleged hit, which I will not mention, In Name Only.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Ortega on August 04, 2008, 11:37:52 AM
What about Dexter's Michael C. Hall as The Riddler?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Keroppi20 on August 04, 2008, 11:40:25 AM
And now I'm looking at Depp's imdb listing and he's rumored to be in a Tim Burton film of the TV soap Dark Shadows movie playing Barnabas Collins?!?!?!?!

Holy shit!

What!!  :o Oh, I got to look into this!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 04, 2008, 11:49:27 AM
Depp owns the film rights. Apparently Barnabas has been a dream role for him for years (don't see it myself but then I don't own the film rights :))

Hmm I wonder if there's enough interest in Dark Shadows to start a new thread devoted to it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Bob on August 04, 2008, 11:59:41 AM

Hmm I wonder if there's enough interest in Dark Shadows to start a new thread devoted to it.

YES THERE IS!!!!!!!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 04, 2008, 12:08:29 PM
Right you are. (http://forum.rifftrax.com/index.php/topic,10322.new.html#new)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 04, 2008, 06:50:31 PM
WTF is Dark Shadows? :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on August 04, 2008, 06:56:09 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Shadows (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Shadows)

It was a horror soap-opera.  Kind of a "One Afterlife to Live" or "All My Vampires".
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 04, 2008, 06:59:30 PM
A bit like Port Charles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Charles)  or Passions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passions) only significantly better.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 04, 2008, 07:03:18 PM
Well, I'll never get to see it I think. Even if the episodes are out there somewhere (probably not), do you have any idea how much hard drive space 1,225 episodes would take up (418 gigs at standard quality)? :P

Also, old shows usually don't do it for me. Too much talking, too slow of a pace. Even a lot of the classics I have trouble sitting through. I'm a very interactive person. Or maybe I just have ADD. :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 04, 2008, 07:06:19 PM
Well if you hate old shows because of too much talking  never try I Claudius.

it's my favorite drama of all time but it is nothing but talking.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Keroppi20 on August 04, 2008, 07:06:51 PM
Well, the episodes are on DVD, but as it is a soap opera it is slow.  You could always check out the movie http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059978/ which would give you an idea of the appeal of the series.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 04, 2008, 07:10:30 PM
Ah and I loved I Clavdivs best  parody of a Blackadder II (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=og3J_s1-bHc) opening sequence ever ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 04, 2008, 07:12:31 PM
yeah that show was so far ahead of it's time they did that parody about seven years before Blackadder 2 aired.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 04, 2008, 07:13:15 PM
Er, yes, I am British. :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 04, 2008, 07:18:19 PM
I was just joking.

Am I the only one who nearly fliped the first time I saw Patrick Steward in it.


I mean some of my favorite actors are British and it was great seeing a lot of them there but I am not used to seeing people who made it big in Hollywood on old BBC shows form the 1970s.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 04, 2008, 07:20:39 PM
Actually seeing Brian Blessed clean shaven is always an odd sight.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Keroppi20 on August 04, 2008, 07:22:07 PM
Yeah, uh so about that Dark Knight guy...    ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 04, 2008, 07:30:30 PM
Well yes that too.

Also it weird not hearing him shouting.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 04, 2008, 07:32:04 PM
The weirdest experience for me was seeing Patrick Stewart with HAIR from back in his Royal Shakespeare Society days... big fucking gobs of afro-like blond stuff. Who knew??
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on August 04, 2008, 07:33:35 PM
Yeah, uh so about that Dark Knight guy...    ;)
eh.. Who cares :-\

 ;D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 04, 2008, 07:34:37 PM
So you've seen it?

I wouldn't have thought someone who found old tv borring could make it to the point he shows up.

Also it is strange seeing him with that much hair.

Where did it all go so fast?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 04, 2008, 07:38:36 PM
So you've seen it?

I wouldn't have thought someone who found old tv borring could make it to the point he shows up.

Also it is strange seeing him with that much hair.

Where did it all go so fast?

We watched a couple of RSS videos in a theater class, and there he was.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RVR II on August 04, 2008, 07:38:45 PM
So you've seen it?

Honestly? no.. :-[

But I have to admit.. With Heath Ledger's death, and an Olsen twin possibly supplying him perscription drugs 'under the table', and then Morgan Freeman's car accident last night, my interest has certainly increased as of late :o
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 04, 2008, 07:43:17 PM
I was talking about I Claudius.

Yo got to watch it in School?

Cool.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Variety of Cells on August 04, 2008, 08:26:45 PM
Saw TDK again yesterday.  One thing had occurred to me: Crispin Glover would make a great Riddler.

I can't argue with that at all.   :)

The ONLY thing about this movie that really bugs me at this point is that party scene. What the hell happened after Batman and Rachel went out the window? The scene just ENDS and it doesn't make any sense. I watched it more carefully on second viewing, and it really is pretty much dropped with no explanation whatsoever. It's irritating.

Yeah....you have a very good point there.  So did Joker just turn and run?  Did he mow everyone in the place down out of frustration? It is amazingly bad story telling in the middle of an otherwise well-written script, isn't it?  It's like it's assumed that the audience's interest is on Batman and only Batman so as long as the story follows him, screw what else is going on.

Guess it's one of those "McGuffins" Hitchcock talked about.


I don't think that's quite a McGuffin...

And I have a feeling that the Joker's exit being left out has anything to do with the script.  It most likely was the editors decision.  His exit was most likely shot, but if they went back to the joker leaving after batman's fall, it might not have flowed as nicely.  Of course it's hard to say without having the footage in front of you, but I don't think it's terribly important to go back to the joker.  We can figure out on our own that he left.  Just like how we don't need to see the man get in his car and follow the car as he drives to the store.  If he goes to the store, we assume he drove there.  If the joker killed everyone at the party, they would have showed it.  I think it's safe to assume he just left.

EDIT: Or it might have been cut to make a film that borders on lengthy a little more manageable, because once again, it's not necessary.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 04, 2008, 08:48:34 PM
Hey what are you doing talking about The Dark Knight in an I Claudius thread?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: gbeenie on August 04, 2008, 09:05:44 PM
The ONLY thing about this movie that really bugs me at this point is that party scene. What the hell happened after Batman and Rachel went out the window? The scene just ENDS and it doesn't make any sense. I watched it more carefully on second viewing, and it really is pretty much dropped with no explanation whatsoever. It's irritating.


I'm hoping the resolution was cut for time (!!!); maybe it'll be on the DVD.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: gbeenie on August 04, 2008, 09:19:15 PM
I noticed something.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm led to wonder just how much wheeling-and-dealing went on behind the scenes to get The Dark Knight a PG-13.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 04, 2008, 09:24:15 PM
Well they did a good job of cutting it so you don't see most of the vilolance(Something that I think makes scarier)so I am not sure if any was needed.

Maybe they just forgot to redub that line in post.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 05, 2008, 05:27:05 AM
Actually I'm noticing that Violence is less and less a disqualifier for PG-13.

Boobies on the other hand...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 05, 2008, 06:02:26 AM
The ONLY thing about this movie that really bugs me at this point is that party scene. What the hell happened after Batman and Rachel went out the window? The scene just ENDS and it doesn't make any sense. I watched it more carefully on second viewing, and it really is pretty much dropped with no explanation whatsoever. It's irritating.


I'm hoping the resolution was cut for time (!!!); maybe it'll be on the DVD.

Yes, the more I think about it, the more likely this seems as the scenario for what went down. I mean, it's a pretty big oversight if Nolan just FORGOT to resolve the scene... it's WAY more likely that they ended up having to leave the end of that scene on the cutting room floor for either plot flow purposes or time constraints.

And, I mean, it's not like they could have decided after the movie was done being shot that the scene was not flowing well and they would reshoot it... since their principal actor up in the penthouse scene was not exactly available for pickups. :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Scrivener on August 05, 2008, 07:33:38 AM
Also it is strange seeing him [Patrick Stewart] with that much hair.

Where did it all go so fast?

Back into its case.

Stewart was already bald by this time (the 70s), but he often used hairpieces for roles.  He once said in an interview that this allowed him to be two actors at once -- with hair and without -- giving him a better chance to land parts.

Obligatory on-topic comment:  it seems the PG-13 rating exists now only to see how far its boundaries can be stretched into previously R-rated territory.  Discuss.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on August 05, 2008, 07:48:39 AM
where'd boogergiggler go, I found a site for him

http://thedarkknightsucks.com/
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 05, 2008, 08:10:10 AM
Yeah see I thought Caspian was getting a violence pass due to its connection to the J-Man but I just think you're more on the money Scrivener.

Oh and yeah Stewart has been receding since he was pretty young. there a pic of him just out of college and already the temples are deserted.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 05, 2008, 08:38:54 AM
Well then he sounds like the perfect person to play Mr.Burns in a live action Simpsons movie(Come on you know Hollywood is going to do it at some point).
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 05, 2008, 08:40:29 AM
He's great on American Dad
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 05, 2008, 08:49:29 AM
That's him?!

To tell you the truth I got sick of Seth Mcfarlem by the time AD started so I have only ever seen the adds.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 05, 2008, 08:51:25 AM
He plays Stan's boss (and in one episode Stan's daughter's boyfriend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeJK4lrbsZI)) I love American Dad, it's much more entertaining than Family Guy.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 05, 2008, 08:54:59 AM
Yeah i figured out who he plays because I have seen the adds on Adult Swim but I am surprised it was him and not just someone cheaper doing his voice.

I may check out AD at some point if I ever get over the way Family Guy is treated like the Bloody second coming when there are much better shows on TV.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 05, 2008, 09:00:39 AM
Oh ok see I wasn't sure how the ads feature the characters.

Frakes and a few others from the TNG cast have turned up in it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: gbeenie on August 05, 2008, 09:07:52 AM
where'd boogergiggler go, I found a site for him

http://thedarkknightsucks.com/


I don't agree with this guy, but I LOVE his single-mindedness.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 05, 2008, 11:50:39 AM
Have you read the site?

So a batman movie sucks if it doesn't have Superman in it?!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on August 05, 2008, 01:42:37 PM
I love how he goes into so much detail about how the Dark Knight is less realistic than Batman Begins, with a point-by-point analysis of all the story points in both movies and so on, and why the ones in the Dark Knight are less realistic.  Oh wait...

And am I reading this correct, that he is saying that Superman would have been more likely to appear in Batman Begins, the supposedly more realistic one?

Not that I'm saying I completely disagree with his assertion (about the realism of the two films), but couldn't he have come up with some evidence to back it up?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 05, 2008, 02:28:05 PM
This site reminds me of Danielcraigeisnotbond.com.

Anyone remember that site?

It went up before the trailer even came out!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: BBQ Platypus on August 05, 2008, 05:48:47 PM
where'd boogergiggler go, I found a site for him

http://thedarkknightsucks.com/


And I thought I was obsessive. ::)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Hebs on August 06, 2008, 10:39:40 AM
where'd boogergiggler go, I found a site for him

http://thedarkknightsucks.com/


I can't believe somebody actually took time out of their life to make that. 

LAME
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 06, 2008, 10:45:10 AM
You should see the James Bond one like this.

It's even worse it is based on the idea that the one and only Bond is Pierce Brosmen.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 06, 2008, 11:09:55 AM
I found a link!

Take a look at this.

http://www.danielcraigisnotbond.com/DanielCraigNotBondJamesBond.html (http://www.danielcraigisnotbond.com/DanielCraigNotBondJamesBond.html)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Nick on August 06, 2008, 11:49:55 AM
I like how his idea of a good prequel is Star Wars Episode 1! That pretty much invalidated the argument for me.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Ortega on August 06, 2008, 01:03:30 PM
I found a link!

Take a look at this.

http://www.danielcraigisnotbond.com/DanielCraigNotBondJamesBond.html (http://www.danielcraigisnotbond.com/DanielCraigNotBondJamesBond.html)

holy shit......what a horrible waste of domain space.....
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Raven on August 06, 2008, 01:08:02 PM
where'd boogergiggler go, I found a site for him

http://thedarkknightsucks.com/


My favorite part was the last one on the page, an article explaining how cheering and clapping in the theater should translate to your thought out reviews.   I know I for one clapped a lot during Schindler's List. 

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 06, 2008, 01:13:34 PM
I like how his idea of a good prequel is Star Wars Episode 1! That pretty much invalidated the argument for me.

What's more the website went up just after the first teaser came out for CR.

In other words he didn't even wait to see Craige before slaming him.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on August 06, 2008, 01:47:48 PM
I like how his idea of a good prequel is Star Wars Episode 1! That pretty much invalidated the argument for me.

What's more the website went up just after the first teaser came out for CR.

In other words he didn't even wait to see Craige before slaming him.

I now have a desire to give this article its own MSTing.  Anyone else want in?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 06, 2008, 01:52:48 PM
ME! ME! ME!

I loved Casino Royal and I know people who didn't like it but this idiot judged it before seeing it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on August 06, 2008, 04:35:06 PM
You should see the James Bond one like this.

It's even worse it is based on the idea that the one and only Bond is Pierce Brosmen.

Isn't that a bit like saying the one and only Inspector Clouseau is Alan Arkin?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 06, 2008, 07:18:08 PM
Bingo.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: gbeenie on August 09, 2008, 06:17:33 PM
Finally saw it on IMAX (at 1 this morning; the 10PM show was sold out). Un-freakin'-believable.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Raven on August 10, 2008, 02:21:49 AM
Finally saw it on IMAX (at 1 this morning; the 10PM show was sold out). Un-freakin'-believable.

I don't think that I'll get to see it in an IMAX.  The nearest one to us is almost 2 hours away.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: ninjacat11 on August 10, 2008, 10:57:20 AM
As great as Heath Ledger is, I'd have to say that the script for this is probably the best and most nuanced I've seen in a summer movie for a long time.

I don't go into these types of movies expecting storylines on par with, say, Shakespeare, but the extra level of smarts in this has certainly brought it to a whole other level for me.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 10, 2008, 11:57:19 AM
I don't go into these types of movies expecting storylines on par with, say, Shakespeare, but the extra level of smarts in this has certainly brought it to a whole other level for me.

*cracks knuckles*

Oh but this storyline would have been right up Will's street, I love the idea that Shakespeare is all high falutin' and stodgy or somehow elevated above the common matter of other narratives.

Shakespeare loved sex, violence, comedy and gore he uses it all the time and he'd have loved the Joker, to say nothing of the other two principal players in this drama.

I can show you if you like, Renaissances Drama is really my thing.  :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Pak-Man on August 10, 2008, 12:26:44 PM
Brings up an interesting question. What kind of movies WOULD Shakespeare make if he were here today? :^)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: torgosPizza on August 10, 2008, 12:31:58 PM
Long, boring ones?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 10, 2008, 12:32:18 PM
Historical Epics, Broad Comedies, and Violent Melodramas  :)


Ben Jonson would mostly make disposable comedies.

Long, boring ones?

Ah,see you've unfortunately been exposed to productions by people operating under the misapprehension I discribed earlier:

Oh but this storyline would have been right up Will's street, I love the idea that Shakespeare is all high falutin' and stodgy or somehow elevated above the common matter of other narratives.

Shakespeare loved sex, violence, comedy and gore he uses it all the time and he'd have loved the Joker, to say nothing of the other two principal players in this drama.

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: doggans on August 10, 2008, 01:23:18 PM
Of course, Shakespeare's plays were also frequently ripoffs re-imaginings of pre-existing stories and plays, so...Shakespeare would be making Tarantino flicks? :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 10, 2008, 01:27:55 PM
Well no, because Shakespeare actually did imaginative things with those original stories...

Oh this has been a good day (started bad, got better) a chance to talk Shakespeare and again reiterate how much I loath Hackentino  ;D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 10, 2008, 02:30:12 PM
Shakespeare used the most beautiful, poetic language imaginable to deliver the most vulgar, low-brow sense of humour possible. You gotta respect that kind of cajones. He was a master of oral manipulation (you in front, stop snickering - nyuk nyuk).

Imagine J.R.R. Tolkein writing a Three Stooges sketch. ;)

Except of course that Shakespeare was simultaneously better with words than Tolkein, and better at slapstick than the stooges. :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: torgosPizza on August 10, 2008, 03:18:04 PM
Ah,see you've unfortunately been exposed to productions by people operating under the misapprehension I discribed earlier:

Does that mean "read and seen faithful adaptations of several of the more famous ones?" If so, then you're correct.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 10, 2008, 03:21:38 PM
Ah,see you've unfortunately been exposed to productions by people operating under the misapprehension I discribed earlier:

Does that mean "read and seen faithful adaptations of several of the more famous ones?" If so, then you're correct.

How could they be faithful adaptations? Was the person who directed it alive 410 years ago when Shakespeare's troupe actually performed the original rendition? ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on August 10, 2008, 03:38:10 PM
Ah,see you've unfortunately been exposed to productions by people operating under the misapprehension I discribed earlier:

Does that mean "read and seen faithful adaptations of several of the more famous ones?" If so, then you're correct.

How could they be faithful adaptations? Was the person who directed it alive 410 years ago when Shakespeare's troupe actually performed the original rendition? ;)

Yeah, a true faithful adaptation would have to include the actors improvising to please the loud rude people in the front and avoid having pennies thrown at them.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 10, 2008, 03:40:28 PM
Ah,see you've unfortunately been exposed to productions by people operating under the misapprehension I discribed earlier:

Does that mean "read and seen faithful adaptations of several of the more famous ones?" If so, then you're correct.

How could they be faithful adaptations? Was the person who directed it alive 410 years ago when Shakespeare's troupe actually performed the original rendition? ;)

Yeah, a true faithful adaptation would have to include the actors improvising to please the loud rude people in the front and avoid having pennies thrown at them.

And dodging all the witches and spirits that were flying around the stage, trying to use the improvised words to open a portal back to their own planet.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 10, 2008, 04:19:02 PM
Ah,see you've unfortunately been exposed to productions by people operating under the misapprehension I discribed earlier:
Does that mean "read and seen faithful adaptations of several of the more famous ones?" If so, then you're correct.
How could they be faithful adaptations? Was the person who directed it alive 410 years ago when Shakespeare's troupe actually performed the original rendition? ;)
Yeah, a true faithful adaptation would have to include the actors improvising to please the loud rude people in the front and avoid having pennies thrown at them.

And that's what I'm talking about, those "Faithful" adaptations aren't really faithful at all, they're faithful to the images of Shakespeare created by Schlegel, the romantics and a few theatrical knights.

I can't recommend the book Roaring Boys enough, it's a really good intro to the world of the Elizabethan and Jacobean theatre.

Sadly, as it's a introduction, it never really delves into the Gallifreyan influence on the stage at that time ;)

Oh and while you're at it, read some Middleton too, he doesn't get half the attention he should :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on August 10, 2008, 09:58:22 PM
Except of course that Shakespeare was simultaneously better with words than Tolkein

While normally I would have to agree with you considering Shakespeare and Tolkien's works as a whole...I have found that there are some passages in Lord of the Rings and the Silmarillion that surpass Shakespeare in every way when it comes to flowing beautiful dialogue...

I've found that sometimes Tolkien's writing is far smoother and more fun to read than Shakespeare's. The words Shakespeare chose to use are far harsher sounding than those Tolkien used. (Latin based words just don't sound that great compared to some old english words)

My english teachers hated me for always saying this to them...

...Iambic Pentameter is boring  :-\


But that's just my take on it, I'm not sure there are that many people who would side with me on this issue. As much as Shakespeare was brilliant (I loved reading him in school because I made a game out of finding out all the crass he had in his plays and laughing about them...seriously, him and Chaucer really shouldn't be read in schools...they were pervs) I just prefer Tolkien.

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Dim of the Yard on August 10, 2008, 10:17:53 PM
My english teachers hated me for always saying this to them...

...Iambic Pentameter is boring  :-\

Oh, I disagree, but for fun reasons.  You know what else is in iambic pentameter?  Emily Dickinson's poetry.  And what ELSE is in iambic pentameter?  The Gilligan's Island theme song.  I find it very hard to believe that iambic pentameter is boring after singing "I Saw A Fly Buzz When I Died" to the tune of Gilligan's Island.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on August 10, 2008, 10:36:36 PM
My english teachers hated me for always saying this to them...

...Iambic Pentameter is boring  :-\

Oh, I disagree, but for fun reasons.  You know what else is in iambic pentameter?  Emily Dickinson's poetry.  And what ELSE is in iambic pentameter?  The Gilligan's Island theme song.  I find it very hard to believe that iambic pentameter is boring after singing "I Saw A Fly Buzz When I Died" to the tune of Gilligan's Island.

Ah man...I wish I'd thought of that when I was in high school (I always resented my english teachers for not let us use our creativity, especially since they were making me resent writing so much in spite of how much I loved it...until I learned that I could do what my english teachers wanted...and be creative in doing it. I learned everything they had to teach me...did well in class, and then did my own research on the side so that I could argue with them through discussions in class, and essays, why I thought that Shakespeare was a hack...I don't really think that, I just had fun explaining to my teachers why their beloved shakespeare was not as great as they thought, and why a lot of stuff people think he did amazingly...Tolkien did better)

...but yeah...I wish I would have thought about comparing Shakespeare to the Gilligan's Island theme song.



...on a slightly funny side note, my english teachers always called me Frodo (completely unrelated to the Tolkien/Shakespeare compare and contrast), because we were taking a test on Romeo and Juliet the day after I went and saw Return of the King at midnight (I was going on two hours of sleep), and I accidentally wrote Frodo as an answer instead of Romeo, ever since then that nickname stuck with me in my english classes. So now, I have a group of people that sneak into those teachers classrooms and write really big on the white board "Frodo Lives." Just as a little reminder of their favorite english student...heh, my teachers really liked and disliked me (Dislike: I was disruptive)(Like: I was interesting)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Raven on August 10, 2008, 11:51:01 PM
How could they be faithful adaptations? Was the person who directed it alive 410 years ago when Shakespeare's troupe actually performed the original rendition? ;)

Yeah, a true faithful adaptation would have to include the actors improvising to please the loud rude people in the front and avoid having pennies thrown at them.
[/quote]

And there would probably be a lot of juggling.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 11, 2008, 04:44:42 AM
Yeah, a true faithful adaptation would have to include the actors improvising to please the loud rude people in the front and avoid having pennies thrown at them.
And there would probably be a lot of juggling.

And performing bears.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 11, 2008, 07:22:18 AM
Fortis,

It's true, a lot of Tolkein's passages are beautiful and wonderfully written. The difference is that pretty much ALL of Shakespeare's stuff is around the same caliber, whereas Tolkein only surpasses Shakespeare some of the time. Also, Shakespeare is a better storyteller at the same time. As far as Tolkein was concerned the story was sort of an inconvenient disturbance that distracted from what was really important to him (the language and to a lesser extent the history). If it would have sold, I have a strong feeling that Tolkein wouldn't have written Lord of the Rings at all, but instead just a book full of nothing but the exploration of language, arts, and poetry. But it wouldn't, so he wrote one of the greatest epics of the modern age instead.

Also you have to remember that, while Iambic Pentameter is indeed quite boring, Shakespeare managed to do everything he did with his words WITHIN that very strict confine, while still managing to sound like completely natural language (for the time period). The most hilarious thing I have ever seen in my life was an actor who actually tried to PERFORM speaking with the "de-duh, de-duh, de-duh, de-duh" rhythm. Tool. ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Cosmic Muse on August 11, 2008, 11:00:55 AM
So, what about The Dark Knight? Anyone think it will surpass the original Star Wars movie in terms of Domestic Box Office intake?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: a pretty girl is like on August 11, 2008, 11:45:42 AM
So, what about The Dark Knight? Anyone think it will surpass the original Star Wars movie in terms of Domestic Box Office intake?

I do.  I think Titanic's record is pretty safe though. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Rude on August 11, 2008, 11:47:55 AM
...

I finally just saw this on Saturday. Pretty damn good.

-Rude
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 11, 2008, 12:17:28 PM
So, what about The Dark Knight? Anyone think it will surpass the original Star Wars movie in terms of Domestic Box Office intake?

I do.  I think Titanic's record is pretty safe though. 

What's the number to beat? God, that movie sucked. :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: a pretty girl is like on August 11, 2008, 12:31:07 PM
So, what about The Dark Knight? Anyone think it will surpass the original Star Wars movie in terms of Domestic Box Office intake?

I do.  I think Titanic's record is pretty safe though. 

What's the number to beat? God, that movie sucked. :P
$600 million + just for the domestic. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: MrTorso on August 11, 2008, 12:34:36 PM
Titanic's domestic box office is: $600,788,188
Star Wars' is:$460,998,007
Dark Knight as of today: $441,541,000

I read an article that if it were to beat those movies based on actual amount of tickets sold it would have to do 900 million dollars to beat Star Wars and 1.2 billion dollars to beat Titanic.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Raven on August 11, 2008, 12:38:52 PM
Titanic's domestic box office is: $600,788,188
Star Wars' is:$460,998,007
Dark Knight as of today: $441,541,000

I read an article that if it were to beat those movies based on actual amount of tickets sold it would have to do 900 million dollars to beat Star Wars and 1.2 billion dollars to beat Titanic.

You have the numbers flipped.  900 million box office would pass Titanic in tickets sold.  The 1.2 billion would beat Star wars adjusted for inflation.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: pezdrake on August 11, 2008, 01:06:55 PM
So, what about The Dark Knight? Anyone think it will surpass the original Star Wars movie in terms of Domestic Box Office intake?

I do.  I think Titanic's record is pretty safe though. 

It would affirm my faith in humanity if it beats Titanic so I really hope it does.  I'm already happy that it has beaten Home Alone.  (It has beaten Home Alone hasn't it?)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: pezdrake on August 11, 2008, 01:15:14 PM
Titanic's domestic box office is: $600,788,188
Star Wars' is:$460,998,007
Dark Knight as of today: $441,541,000

I read an article that if it were to beat those movies based on actual amount of tickets sold it would have to do 900 million dollars to beat Star Wars and 1.2 billion dollars to beat Titanic.

You have the numbers flipped.  900 million box office would pass Titanic in tickets sold.  The 1.2 billion would beat Star wars adjusted for inflation.


I might be reading his post wrong Raven but I think he was right.  He was saying adjusted for ticket price increases, not inflation.  Since tickets only cost a couple of bucks in 1977, you have to sell a lot more money wise in order to equal the same amount of 1977 $ to equal the same number of tickets  - 10 bucks today = 1 ticket whereas 10 bucks in 1977 = 5 tickets. (I know I messed that explanation up but I think you get my meaning).
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: MrTorso on August 11, 2008, 01:26:56 PM
I did have the numbers flipped.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Raven on August 11, 2008, 02:02:45 PM
Here's the link.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26124600/
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 11, 2008, 02:10:57 PM
I just got back from seeing it a third time.

This time I was with my mom,she loved it despite the fact that she normally hates movies that are this dark.

I really hope this beats Titanic.

The theater was still packed today so who knows maybe it can.

Hey I was just thinking maybe the reason they didn't show Barbra Gordon wasn't because they diidn't even want to show her but maybe they plan on using Batgirl and they just didn't want to have to chooses an actress yet.

Oh yeah i really want to go back and see this a fourth time.

I can't say that about most movies.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on August 11, 2008, 03:40:57 PM
Hey I was just thinking maybe the reason they didn't show Barbra Gordon wasn't because they didn't even want to show her but maybe they plan on using Batgirl and they just didn't want to have to chooses an actress yet.

I don't think that Nolan is interested in having Batgirl in there at all, but it might be an indication that if the series continues without him they'd have the option of casting anyone they wanted.  I thought the fact that they showed her so young was a way of telling the audience "remember, we're still near the begining here, Batgirl is a long way away." but I could be wrong and it doesn't explain why they wouldn't show her face.

Interesting that she isn't even listed as Barbara in cast list (at least according to IMDB)  Maybe since his wife is named Barbara in the movies they didn't want confusion.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 11, 2008, 04:32:54 PM
Yeah that could be it.

I kind of think Batman could use a sidekick of some kind in the next movie,I mean with both the police and the underworld after him it couldn't hurt to have someone to watch his back.

Also now he doesn't really have any friends except Alfred.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Mr.M on August 11, 2008, 07:19:35 PM
"a sidekick of some kind"
You've heard of Robin, right? [not Robin Wright].
I really don't think Robin would be a good addition at all. Nolan is doing a fantastic job of keeping Batman's story dark
& I feel that Robin getting involved would mess up the whole feeling he has going now.
Regardless, it'll be very interesting to see where Nolan takes the next one [IF he does make any more- I'm hoping he will].
I think he's smart enough to only make what he feels will be a good film.
He's only made a handful & so far none of them have missed.

If anyone else decides to continue making them hopefully they wont screw it up the way Warner Bros
made Schumacher do. At least he apologized later.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: MrTorso on August 11, 2008, 07:21:19 PM
I really don't want to see a Robin at all.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Compound on August 11, 2008, 09:20:11 PM
I really don't want to see a Robin at all.

(http://images.teamsugar.com/files/upl1/1/13839/16_2008/97006_D0976.JPG)

Aw.... But she wanted to go to the mall with you.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Cosmic Muse on August 12, 2008, 05:36:29 AM
I really don't want to see a Robin at all.

The Tim Drake Robin from the comics isn't all that bad though. If a future director does use Robin, this is the Robin they should use.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 12, 2008, 05:53:28 AM
I think the reason people don't want to see Robin on the big screen is the same reason why for years they didn't want to see Batman on the big screen,they are thinking of the Adam West version.

If anything Robin is even darker then Batman,he has his whole family wiped out in front of him and he seems to keep his feelings about it a lot more bottled up then Batman.

If the costume bothers you they can always change it they did a great job with Two Face,or they could just call him Nightwing right off the bat.

Also you could have a story were he is not really working with Batman he is just another guy in a costume that Batman can't catch.

I really don't think there is no way to do Robin good.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on August 12, 2008, 05:58:49 AM
I think the reason people don't want to see Robin on the big screen is the same reason why for years they didn't want to see Batman on the big screen,they are thinking of the Adam West version.

If anything Robin is even darker then Batman,he has his whole family wiped out in front of him and he seems to keep his feelings about it a lot more bottled up then Batman.

If the costume bothers you they can always change it they did a great job with Two Face,or they could just call him Nightwing right off the bat.

Also you could have a story were he is not really working with Batman he is just another guy in a costume that Batman can't catch.

I really don't think there is no way to do Robin good.

It really isn't the same.  Robin has always been a way to lighten the image of Batman.  The character (Characters actually, as there've been many Robins) have had very dark moments, but the bulk of Robin's role is to be the lighthearted counterpoint.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 12, 2008, 06:06:31 AM
But that doesn't mean he has to always be light harted,I mean for a long time The Joker was just a guy who pulled pranks and look how he turned out.

Look I am not saying I will riot if he is not in the next movie I am just saying I don't buy into this whole idea that there is no way to make Robin work.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: James of LinHood on August 12, 2008, 06:15:31 AM
If the costume bothers you they can always change it they did a great job with Two Face,or they could just call him Nightwing right off the bat.

No pun intended, right?   :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Natureboy on August 12, 2008, 06:48:54 AM
She's a fucking hack.

That's essentially what I was trying to say, but sometimes I get called out for being slightly ranty-bitchy, so I thought I'd try the calm explanation look on for size.   ;)

But yeah, she's a fucking hack. 

Right, as her Academy Award proves, she just doesn't have the chops. 

sorry, had to point that out.

Her sex symbol status doesn't take away from the fact that she can be a great actress at times (certainly not in Mr. and Mrs. smith though)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 12, 2008, 06:59:52 AM
I'm sorry but i have never seen her be good in anything.

The same goes for Halle Barry.

If either of them are in the next movie that yells stunt casting to me.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: dignan on August 12, 2008, 07:10:26 AM
Maybe they could bring in Stephanie Brown and have the Spoiler storyline. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Natureboy on August 12, 2008, 07:40:20 AM
I'm sorry but i have never seen her be good in anything.

The same goes for Halle Barry.

If either of them are in the next movie that yells stunt casting to me.

Monster's Ball - Berry
Girl Interrupted - Jolie
Both fantastic performances.

But your point is taken, I left myself wide open being so vague.  Not all Oscar winning actresses are the cream of the Crop (Catherine Zeta-Jones in that painful film Chicago) or actors for that matter, George Clooney always acts like George Clooney in everything. 

I was just pointing out that it is not fair to write Jolie off as a "fucking hack" just because she is tabloid fodder or because she has now gone where the money is, the action genre.  Watch her older independent stuff to see what I am talking about..
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 12, 2008, 07:53:21 AM
OK point taken.

I am still hurting from Die another Day and Mr and Mrs.Smith so maybe I am not the best judge.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Natureboy on August 12, 2008, 08:03:21 AM
OK point taken.

I am still hurting from Die another Day and Mr and Mrs.Smith so maybe I am not the best judge.

Agreed, I do have a special respect for Halle Berry though because she did attend the Razzies and accept her award for Worst Actress for her performance in Catwoman.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 12, 2008, 08:35:32 AM
She did that?!

Has anyone else in Hollywood ever done that?

Maybe she is cool after all.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 12, 2008, 08:55:50 AM
Cosby accepted his "awards" for Leonard Part Six, though I think Halle's acceptance appearance was funnier.

http://www.youtube.com/v/NxLa73N6Rls&hl=en&fs=1
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Natureboy on August 12, 2008, 08:58:40 AM
She did that?!

Has anyone else in Hollywood ever done that?

Maybe she is cool after all.

(http://www.agonyboothmedia.com/images/articles/Interview_with_John_Wilson/Interview_with_John_Wilson_001.jpg)

Agony Booth webmaster Albert Walker did an interview with John Wilson, creator of the Razzies

Here is his answer to how Berry's appearance came about:

 
 

AW: How did it come about that Halle Berry accepted her Razzie in person? Who's idea was it, and what do you think was Halle's primary motivation in accepting the award personally?

I saw an online item attributed to an Irish newspaper, "quoting" Halle Berry saying she intended to attend our ceremonies if she won for Catwoman, and "strut proudly up the red carpet" to accept. When I called Berry's publicist to either confirm or deny the quote, I was told that it was fabricated and that Halle already had a charity event she was booked to attend on Oscar Eve in 2005 (the night of our 25th Annual awards). I then told the publicist that if the quote was untrue, we had no intention of pursuing the matter, and I appreciated her taking my call.



Worst Actress "winner" Halle Berry brought the house down at the 25th Annual RAZZIES by becoming the first star of her caliber to show up and accept her award.
Apparently, that set things in motion, and Berry then spoke with several friends and fellow actors from Catwoman, all of whom seem to have encouraged her to show up as a lark. About 28 hours before the ceremony was scheduled, I got another call from Halle's publicist, letting me know that Berry did plan to attend, and setting some ground rules: I was to tell no one she would be showing up; We had to sneak her in backstage, so neither the audience nor the press in attendance would know she was there until she walked out to accept her Razzie; and that I had to read the publicist the section of the show script that dealt with Berry and her performance.

One of the most amusing devices we've used over the years is finding the funniest (i.e., nastiest) actual critic's quote for each of the nominees. For Berry, we had a newspaper quote which read: "Yoo-hoo, Miss Berry—The Academy's calling... they want their statue back!" When I read the publicist that quote, she laughed and said Halle herself had read the quote to her over the phone when the film was released. The publicist suggested that "maybe some fun could be had" playing off the quote.

When Berry arrived backstage halfway through our ceremonies, she had an entourage with her, including Alex Borstein, who played her best friend in the film, and her manager, who had a black velvet bag in his hand. Just before I went onstage to announce that Halle had "won", the manager pulled Berry's Academy Award out of the velvet bag and asked, "Do you have any problem if she brings this out with her?" I thought the idea was hilarious, and suggested that I actually hand her her Razzie before she came out, so she'd be entering with an Oscar in one hand and a Razzie in the other. Her entrance almost literally brought down the house—She got a minute-long standing ovation, then launched into a joke and expletive-peppered parody of her own Oscar speech from a few years earlier, totally endearing herself to our audience and the press.

You can view her entire speech on our website, and you can also view a clip from Inside the Actors Studio in which Halle explains her motives for attending the Razzies.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 12, 2008, 09:07:05 AM
That's OK, the sound and image quality isn't the best on the vid.

She actually is a class act. :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 12, 2008, 09:18:21 AM
Wow she sounds like a really cool person.

Nice to know she didn't let the Oscer go to her head like some people do.

Didn't Cosby go on tv and tell people not to see Leonard part Six?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Natureboy on August 12, 2008, 09:19:39 AM
Wow she sounds like a really cool person.

Nice to know she didn't let the Oscer go to her head like some people do.

Didn't Cosby go on tv and tell people not to see Leonard part Six?

If he didn't he should have......

Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 12, 2008, 09:21:24 AM
I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that he went on a Talk show the week it came out and did that.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 12, 2008, 09:23:22 AM
Yep he did. And then he had them make solid gold razzies to present to him.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 12, 2008, 09:29:08 AM
I wonder if he has that siting proudly on shelf somewhere in his house.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 12, 2008, 10:18:25 AM
She's a fucking hack.

That's essentially what I was trying to say, but sometimes I get called out for being slightly ranty-bitchy, so I thought I'd try the calm explanation look on for size.   ;)

But yeah, she's a fucking hack. 

Right, as her Academy Award proves, she just doesn't have the chops. 

sorry, had to point that out.

Her sex symbol status doesn't take away from the fact that she can be a great actress at times (certainly not in Mr. and Mrs. smith though)

Yes, an arbitrary award granted by a collection of stifled old codgers PROVES (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) that she has talent. ;) :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck on August 12, 2008, 10:21:23 AM
Yes, an arbitrary award granted by a collection of stifled old codgers PROVES (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) that she has talent. ;) :P

They did give "Best Picture" to Gladiator, remember.   ::)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Dim of the Yard on August 12, 2008, 10:23:01 AM
From my understanding, Tom Green also accepted his Razzie in person, but he used the opportunity to bitch out everybody at the Razzies.  Then again, when one thinks "Tom Green," the words "class act" don't exactly come to mind.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Natureboy on August 12, 2008, 10:24:22 AM
She's a fucking hack.

That's essentially what I was trying to say, but sometimes I get called out for being slightly ranty-bitchy, so I thought I'd try the calm explanation look on for size.   ;)

But yeah, she's a fucking hack. 

Right, as her Academy Award proves, she just doesn't have the chops. 

sorry, had to point that out.

Her sex symbol status doesn't take away from the fact that she can be a great actress at times (certainly not in Mr. and Mrs. smith though)

Yes, an arbitrary award granted by a collection of stifled old codgers PROVES (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) that she has talent. ;) :P

Yeah man, why believe people that have made movies all of their lives, what do they know?   :P

I will admit that they aren't infallible....hell, Chariots of Fire won an Oscar.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Natureboy on August 12, 2008, 10:31:53 AM
From my understanding, Tom Green also accepted his Razzie in person, but he used the opportunity to bitch out everybody at the Razzies.  Then again, when one thinks "Tom Green," the words "class act" don't exactly come to mind.

Paul Verhoven accepted his awards in peron for Worst Picture and Worst Director for Showgirls.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 12, 2008, 10:38:35 AM
She's a fucking hack.

That's essentially what I was trying to say, but sometimes I get called out for being slightly ranty-bitchy, so I thought I'd try the calm explanation look on for size.   ;)

But yeah, she's a fucking hack. 

Right, as her Academy Award proves, she just doesn't have the chops. 

sorry, had to point that out.

Her sex symbol status doesn't take away from the fact that she can be a great actress at times (certainly not in Mr. and Mrs. smith though)

Yes, an arbitrary award granted by a collection of stifled old codgers PROVES (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) that she has talent. ;) :P

Yeah man, why believe people that have made movies all of their lives, what do they know?   :P

I will admit that they aren't infallible....hell, Chariots of Fire won an Oscar.

See, that's exactly my point.

Roughly 98% of all movies stink on hot fucking ice, so as far as I'm concerned, being "experienced" in the industry ABSOLUTELY disqualifies you from being able to judge quality. :P
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Natureboy on August 12, 2008, 10:48:12 AM
But, still in all, I can't think a truly terrible performance from an actor being rewarded with an Oscar.  The closest I can get to that scenario was Julia Roberts winning for Erin Brockovich.  And the fact remains, Angelina did one hell of a job in Girl Interrupted.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 12, 2008, 10:53:06 AM
Well people often bring up Marisa Tomei in My Cousin Vinny as an example of a performace that shouldn't have got an Oscar but did. But I say fie on that because she's scrumptious.  ;D
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Natureboy on August 12, 2008, 11:21:22 AM
All this stuff is subjective......I have friends who rave about Michael Douglas in Wall Street.  I think that guy should have retired from movies 20 years ago, he looks like a shiveled up nutsack on a cold November morning.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Natureboy on August 12, 2008, 12:39:20 PM
All this stuff is subjective......I have friends who rave about Michael Douglas in Wall Street.  I think that guy should have retired from movies 20 years ago, he looks like a shiveled up nutsack on a cold November morning.

To be fair, Wall Street was 21 years ago...

True, I probably could have said 35 years ago, he liked like hammered hell when he was on The Streets of San Francisco.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck on August 12, 2008, 12:48:01 PM
All this stuff is subjective......I have friends who rave about Michael Douglas in Wall Street.  I think that guy should have retired from movies 20 years ago, he looks like a shiveled up nutsack on a cold November morning.

To be fair, Wall Street was 21 years ago...

True, I probably could have said 35 years ago, he liked like hammered hell when he was on The Streets of San Francisco.
Dare I say I liked him in Romancing the Stone?  Not much else.  But that one.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Natureboy on August 12, 2008, 01:18:48 PM
I am trying to think of something of his that I did like...........and I can't think of anything.

BTW - Sorry for highjacking this thread.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on August 12, 2008, 06:35:13 PM
I have yet to see Halle Berry in a role where I haven't thought any other actress could have done the role better. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on August 12, 2008, 08:04:11 PM
I have yet to see Halle Berry in a role where I haven't thought any other actress could have done the role better. 

Especially in the X-Men movies, where quite literally any other actress could have done the role better. 

Yeah, like any actress could just stand around and pretend to summon lightning.......
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 12, 2008, 09:34:24 PM
I am trying to think of something of his that I did like...........and I can't think of anything.

BTW - Sorry for highjacking this thread.

The Game was quite entertaining. Even with ol' nutsack in the starring role.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Raven on August 12, 2008, 10:38:53 PM
I am trying to think of something of his that I did like...........and I can't think of anything.

BTW - Sorry for highjacking this thread.

The Game was quite entertaining. Even with ol' nutsack in the starring role.

I really liked The Ghost and The Darkness.  Although, he wasn't really in it that much.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: James of LinHood on August 13, 2008, 03:46:27 AM
So......how about that Dark Knight?  Pretty great movie, right?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: GregMcduck on August 13, 2008, 04:17:05 AM
I think we're pooped out with The Dark Knight.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 13, 2008, 04:42:46 AM
I think this thread may qualify for "most off-topic ever." I mean, EVEN for us, we went pretty far off topic, in several different directions. ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: GregMcduck on August 13, 2008, 04:48:53 AM
Anyone want to talk about salt water taffy?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Chaos on August 13, 2008, 05:17:01 AM
I like eggs.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: dignan on August 13, 2008, 05:17:58 AM
Anyone want to talk about salt water taffy?
I don't like the blue ones.  You'd think the blue ones would have a solid fruit flavor...blueberry or raspberry, perhaps.  But no, it's more of a cotton candy flavor.  Ugh.  
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on August 13, 2008, 05:19:29 AM
I like eggs.

What do eggs have to do with saltwater taffy?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 13, 2008, 05:21:52 AM
I rather like the chocolate flavoured taffy you can get at Cedar Point (which is pretty much the only place I've eaten it).
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: dignan on August 13, 2008, 05:23:19 AM
Cedar Point is a fantastic place.  I haven't been in a few years, but the last time I went, Millennium Force was shut down!  I was dismayed.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 13, 2008, 05:26:48 AM
Yeah I still need to go this year. Thankfully my favorite rides, the wooden coasters, generally don't have long lines.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Pak-Man on August 13, 2008, 12:28:48 PM
Anyone want to talk about salt water taffy?
That depends. Is Salt Water Taffy on the top 50 candy list? :^)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 13, 2008, 12:47:34 PM
That might explain the lack of the line, he's probably one ride ahead of me each time  :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on August 13, 2008, 02:49:21 PM
Quote
Robert Downey Jr starred in "Iron Man," the biggest surprise-hit of the year. But how does he feel about the other comic book movie that is currently aiming to become the second biggest earner of all time, "The Dark Knight." Moviehole got the chance to speak to Downey, who was not shy about expressing his feelings toward the new Batman film.

"My whole thing is that that I saw 'The Dark Knight'," said Downey. "I feel like I'm dumb because I feel like I don't get how many things that are so smart. It's like a Ferrari engine of storytelling and script writing and I'm like, 'That's not my idea of what I want to see in a movie.' I loved 'The Prestige' but didn't understand 'The Dark Knight'. Didn't get it, still can't tell you what happened in the movie, what happened to the character and in the end they need him to be a bad guy. I'm like, 'I get it. This is so high brow and so f--king smart, I clearly need a college education to understand this movie.' You know what? F-ck DC comics. That's all I have to say and that's where I'm really coming from."

He added that if he never works with DC Comics, it will be fine with him. "You know, you're never too old to burn your bridges because I believe I have offended everyone," he said. "I think I've got a couple more. 'I'll burn that bridge when I come to it' is my favorite phrase I've ever coined."
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on August 13, 2008, 06:56:59 PM
oh yeah, also,

Spoiler (click to show/hide)


Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 13, 2008, 07:23:36 PM
So Downey Jr thinks all movies should be dumb popcorn flicks like Iron Man and Tropic Thunder?!

to each his own i guess but i don't see either of those movies ruling the boxoffice four weeks in a row.

Good thing most of America is smarter then him.

Then again maybe he was just doped up when he saw it.

Wouldn't it be great if The Dark Knight beat Tropic Thunder this weekend?

I know nobody think it is going to happen but nobody thought The Dark knight was going to win last weekend either or make $300 million in 10 days.

I just think that would be sweet.

Nothing turns me off a movies star more then them badmouthing someone else's work.

I mean what makes the movies he has made so much better?

Or is he bragging about how dumb his movies are?

What is the point of this?

I was planing on seeing Tropic thunder but I wouldn't be doing that now.

Good job Robby!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on August 13, 2008, 07:28:58 PM
Oh Christ people, he was joking.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Sideswipe on August 13, 2008, 07:59:31 PM
Quote
Robert Downey Jr starred in "Iron Man," the biggest surprise-hit of the year. But how does he feel about the other comic book movie that is currently aiming to become the second biggest earner of all time, "The Dark Knight." Moviehole got the chance to speak to Downey, who was not shy about expressing his feelings toward the new Batman film.

"My whole thing is that that I saw 'The Dark Knight'," said Downey. "I feel like I'm dumb because I feel like I don't get how many things that are so smart. It's like a Ferrari engine of storytelling and script writing and I'm like, 'That's not my idea of what I want to see in a movie.' I loved 'The Prestige' but didn't understand 'The Dark Knight'. Didn't get it, still can't tell you what happened in the movie, what happened to the character and in the end they need him to be a bad guy. I'm like, 'I get it. This is so high brow and so f--king smart, I clearly need a college education to understand this movie.' You know what? F-ck DC comics. That's all I have to say and that's where I'm really coming from."

He added that if he never works with DC Comics, it will be fine with him. "You know, you're never too old to burn your bridges because I believe I have offended everyone," he said. "I think I've got a couple more. 'I'll burn that bridge when I come to it' is my favorite phrase I've ever coined."

Ass-clown.

Robert Downey Jr. Kicks ass.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 13, 2008, 08:04:22 PM
You would say that you stupid Go-Bot! ;)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on August 13, 2008, 10:01:00 PM
oh yeah, also,

Spoiler (click to show/hide)




Well, just because something is in the script, that doesn't make it canonical.  Sometimes scenes get rewritten on set because what was in the script didn't work.  Other times, they make changes after scenes don't perform well in test screenings.  And other times changes are made because the director simply changes his mind about some of the facts.  Originally, Luke and Leia were not supposed to be twins, and likely not even siblings.  The script for Star Wars referred to Leia as being 16 and Luke as 20.  Their mother would have had to be in labor a REALLY long time for them to be twins, yet four years apart in age.  Unless Tattoine and Alderaan measure years differently, which, come to think of it, is a distinct possibility.  Actually, now that I think about it, it does make sense.  What are the chances that two different planets in two different solar systems would take the same amount of time to make a complete orbit of the sun?  Anyway, another reason things from the script get changed is that sometimes they make changes based on the actors.  You might write a character as being a slick New Yorker, but then you get an actor who decides to read the character with a southern accent, and decide you like that better, so you alter the character's origin so that he comes from Tennessee instead of Long Island.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on August 14, 2008, 05:22:20 AM
Quote
Robert Downey Jr starred in "Iron Man," the biggest surprise-hit of the year. But how does he feel about the other comic book movie that is currently aiming to become the second biggest earner of all time, "The Dark Knight." Moviehole got the chance to speak to Downey, who was not shy about expressing his feelings toward the new Batman film.

"My whole thing is that that I saw 'The Dark Knight'," said Downey. "I feel like I'm dumb because I feel like I don't get how many things that are so smart. It's like a Ferrari engine of storytelling and script writing and I'm like, 'That's not my idea of what I want to see in a movie.' I loved 'The Prestige' but didn't understand 'The Dark Knight'. Didn't get it, still can't tell you what happened in the movie, what happened to the character and in the end they need him to be a bad guy. I'm like, 'I get it. This is so high brow and so f--king smart, I clearly need a college education to understand this movie.' You know what? F-ck DC comics. That's all I have to say and that's where I'm really coming from."

He added that if he never works with DC Comics, it will be fine with him. "You know, you're never too old to burn your bridges because I believe I have offended everyone," he said. "I think I've got a couple more. 'I'll burn that bridge when I come to it' is my favorite phrase I've ever coined."

Ass-clown.

Robert Downey Jr. Kicks ass.

totally
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: RoninFox on August 14, 2008, 05:26:05 AM
Oh Christ people, he was joking.

Glad I'm not the only person who thought that.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 14, 2008, 05:30:56 AM
It's so monumentally over the top the tongue has to be jammed into the cheek.

Rather than "Ass Clown", I think "Magnificent Bastard" might be a more appropriate response :)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on August 14, 2008, 06:06:40 AM
It's so monumentally over the top the tongue has to be jammed into the cheek.

Rather than "Ass Clown", I think "Magnificent Bastard" might be a more appropriate response :)

totally


it reminds me a lot of that youtube clip where Iron man gets pissed off at Batman because The Dark Knight may actually live up to the hype

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDxgNjMTPIs
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on August 14, 2008, 06:59:45 AM
It's so monumentally over the top the tongue has to be jammed into the cheek.


I'd let him jam his tongue into my cheek.

Ew.  That seems like it would hurt.  What I'm saying is I'd like to have sex with him.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 14, 2008, 07:01:10 AM
He was either Joking or it was the drugs talking,take your pick.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 14, 2008, 07:03:35 AM
It's so monumentally over the top the tongue has to be jammed into the cheek.


I'd let him jam his tongue into my cheek.

Ew.  That seems like it would hurt.  What I'm saying is I'd like to have sex with him.

I think Ann might fight you for that opportunity.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck on August 14, 2008, 07:48:25 AM
He was either Joking or it was the drugs talking,take your pick.
I want to believe that the drugs are gone in that one.....at least I'm willing to give him the benefit.

And you know what, even if he was serious when he said....

Quote
"My whole thing is that that I saw 'The Dark Knight'," said Downey. "I feel like I'm dumb because I feel like I don't get how many things that are so smart. It's like a Ferrari engine of storytelling and script writing and I'm like, 'That's not my idea of what I want to see in a movie.' "

That's his opinion of what he enjoys when he goes to the movies.  He doesn't want stuff where he has to work to be entertained.   And I can understand that.  Everyone likes something different.  That's why there's more than one flavor of ice cream.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Courtney on August 14, 2008, 07:50:19 AM
He was either Joking or it was the drugs talking,take your pick.
I want to believe that the drugs are gone in that one.....at least I'm willing to give him the benefit.

It actually bothers me when people question his sobriety without reason.  But I'm pretty oversensitive when it comes to jokes about addicts.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 14, 2008, 08:29:13 AM
He was either Joking or it was the drugs talking,take your pick.
I want to believe that the drugs are gone in that one.....at least I'm willing to give him the benefit.

And you know what, even if he was serious when he said....

Quote
"My whole thing is that that I saw 'The Dark Knight'," said Downey. "I feel like I'm dumb because I feel like I don't get how many things that are so smart. It's like a Ferrari engine of storytelling and script writing and I'm like, 'That's not my idea of what I want to see in a movie.' "

That's his opinion of what he enjoys when he goes to the movies.  He doesn't want stuff where he has to work to be entertained.   And I can understand that.  Everyone likes something different.  That's why there's more than one flavor of ice cream.

No there isn't,Rocky Road is the only flavor!!!!

Don't you have to think at some point to follow the plot of any movie that isn't Epic movie.

Seems to me everything he has made violated his own rule.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Rude on August 14, 2008, 08:29:40 AM
Quote from: daltysmilth
Well, just because something is in the script, that doesn't make it canonical.  Sometimes scenes get rewritten on set because what was in the script didn't work.  Other times, they make changes after scenes don't perform well in test screenings.  And other times changes are made because the director simply changes his mind about some of the facts.  Originally, Luke and Leia were not supposed to be twins, and likely not even siblings.  The script for Star Wars referred to Leia as being 16 and Luke as 20.  Their mother would have had to be in labor a REALLY long time for them to be twins, yet four years apart in age.  Unless Tattoine and Alderaan measure years differently, which, come to think of it, is a distinct possibility.  Actually, now that I think about it, it does make sense.  What are the chances that two different planets in two different solar systems would take the same amount of time to make a complete orbit of the sun?

That has got to be the best digression i've ever seen! It was like reading a big nerdy stream of consciousness... awesome.

-Rude
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Natureboy on August 14, 2008, 02:45:41 PM
He was either Joking or it was the drugs talking,take your pick.
I want to believe that the drugs are gone in that one.....at least I'm willing to give him the benefit.

It actually bothers me when people question his sobriety without reason.  But I'm pretty oversensitive when it comes to jokes about addicts.

After watching him in Iron Man, I think he is clean and sober.  Downey gave a great performance in that movie and if he was wasted in between takes, it would have shown up in his performance.  What is strange though is that he is admitting that he is not smart enough to be able to follow TDK plot. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: bettertomorrowamy on August 14, 2008, 02:52:20 PM
He was either Joking or it was the drugs talking,take your pick.
I want to believe that the drugs are gone in that one.....at least I'm willing to give him the benefit.

It actually bothers me when people question his sobriety without reason.  But I'm pretty oversensitive when it comes to jokes about addicts.

After watching him in Iron Man, I think he is clean and sober.  Downey gave a great performance in that movie and if he was wasted in between takes, it would have shown up in his performance.  What is strange though is that he is admitting that he is not smart enough to be able to follow TDK plot. 

I can understand what he's saying.  Are drugs like that?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Natureboy on August 14, 2008, 02:58:14 PM
He was either Joking or it was the drugs talking,take your pick.
I want to believe that the drugs are gone in that one.....at least I'm willing to give him the benefit.

It actually bothers me when people question his sobriety without reason.  But I'm pretty oversensitive when it comes to jokes about addicts.

After watching him in Iron Man, I think he is clean and sober.  Downey gave a great performance in that movie and if he was wasted in between takes, it would have shown up in his performance.  What is strange though is that he is admitting that he is not smart enough to be able to follow TDK plot. 

I can understand what he's saying.  Are drugs like that?

sure, you ever watched a Woody Harrelson performance?
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: pezdrake on August 15, 2008, 07:38:32 AM
Quote from: daltysmilth
Well, just because something is in the script, that doesn't make it canonical.  Sometimes scenes get rewritten on set because what was in the script didn't work.  Other times, they make changes after scenes don't perform well in test screenings.  And other times changes are made because the director simply changes his mind about some of the facts.  Originally, Luke and Leia were not supposed to be twins, and likely not even siblings.  The script for Star Wars referred to Leia as being 16 and Luke as 20.  Their mother would have had to be in labor a REALLY long time for them to be twins, yet four years apart in age.  Unless Tattoine and Alderaan measure years differently, which, come to think of it, is a distinct possibility.  Actually, now that I think about it, it does make sense.  What are the chances that two different planets in two different solar systems would take the same amount of time to make a complete orbit of the sun?

That has got to be the best digression i've ever seen! It was like reading a big nerdy stream of consciousness... awesome.

-Rude

Yeah I had to laugh as I was reading that.  Bravo. :clap:
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 15, 2008, 07:41:04 AM
Drugs are also like any David Lynch movie,but i bet you knew that already.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: pezdrake on August 15, 2008, 08:06:32 AM
Life imitates art:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080814/ap_on_fe_st/odd_joker_arrested
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Doctor Who? on August 15, 2008, 09:12:23 AM
Who know there wasn't a DNA match so maybe that was the Real Joker.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: ninjacat11 on August 15, 2008, 02:16:19 PM
I could be wrong, but I think this is the first teaser a fanmade poster for the next Batman.
(http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/6125/1218761631144iq0.jpg)

If it is true, this could be very, very interesting.

EDIT: Actually, I checked up, and this is a fan poster. Still worth sharing, though.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 15, 2008, 02:18:10 PM
I hope so.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: a pretty girl is like on August 15, 2008, 02:43:41 PM
A lot of wishful thinking unfortunately since the third movie hasn't even been greenlit. 

Pretty though.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Dim of the Yard on August 15, 2008, 02:53:51 PM
I'm digging the poster a lot.  The website on it doesn't even exist yet, though.  I think it would be great to register the website for the sole purpose of rickrolling everybody who visits the site, but it might be a bit much for a prank, and I'm certainly not about to do it.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Sideswipe on August 15, 2008, 02:58:22 PM
A lot of wishful thinking unfortunately since the third movie hasn't even been greenlit. 

Pretty though.

I would think that with the money that the Dark Knight has made a sequel would be inevitable. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Fortis on August 15, 2008, 03:03:27 PM
A lot of wishful thinking unfortunately since the third movie hasn't even been greenlit. 

Pretty though.

I would think that with the money that the Dark Knight has made a sequel would be inevitable. 

Yeah, and I always heard that they all signed for three movies...
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Bairman on August 15, 2008, 03:14:16 PM
This afternoon I went to see TDK for the second time.  Now I remember why I hate the general population so much, rarely go to the cinema, and invested in a home theater.  I can't wait until it's released on DVD so I can finally enjoy it in peace.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: ninjacat11 on August 15, 2008, 03:34:16 PM
CAP got a hold of this movie.

http://www.capalert.com/capreports/darkknight-the.htm (http://www.capalert.com/capreports/darkknight-the.htm)

CAP sins commited in this movie:

Wanton Violence/Crime (W) - Zero out of 100
# robbery with gunfire to kill
# firearm threat, frequent
# beating, repeatedly
# gunfire to kill / attempted murder by gunfire, frequent
# action violence of varying intensities, repeatedly
# ]surgical procedures
# injuries
# criminal proceedings throughout
# planning to kill, repeatedly
# contract to kill
# knife threat to face, repeatedly
# tale of murderous family life, extreme family dysfunction
# abduction, repeatedly
# torture, repeatedly
# killing people until compliance is extorted
# gunfire to intimidate
# firearm threat to head
# multiple hostages
# blade impalement
# series of insane, sadistic threats
# sight of murder victims, repeatedly
# extortion throughout, including using lives as leverage
# reckless driving, repeatedly
# assault by fall
# vehicular assault, repeatedly
# other assault, repeatedly
# attempted murder by incineration
# burn gore, repeatedly, long sequences
# soliciting assisted suicide (holding barrel of gun held by another to one's head)
# massive explosions
# threat to kill hundreds, including children
# animal attack
# child as hostage
# firearm threat to child's head
# fall with unconsciousness

Impudence/Hate (I) - 40 out of 100
# 13 uses of the three/four letter word vocabulary
# lying, repeatedly
# blaming victim for criminal's deeds throughout
# submitting to extortion
# submitting to terrorist's demands
# "The only sensible way to live in this world is without rules"
# order to lie

Sexual Immorality (S) - 81 out of 100
# excessive cleavage
# implication of cohabitation
# crude anatomical reference
# women as toys / ornaments, repeatedly
# man and woman buttoning up their clothes after implied intercourse
# adults in underwear
# use of term for multiple rape

Drugs/Alcohol (D) - 76 out of 100
# reference to drug dealing
# party drinking
# booze as a relief
# drinking, twice
# bar
# booze

Offense to God (O) - 79 out of 100
# six uses of God's name in vain
# forcing a good guy in a bad guy role [Isa. 5:20]

Murder/Suicide (M) - Zero out of 100
# at least 19 individual murders plus a couple multiple murders
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: a pretty girl is like on August 15, 2008, 03:37:22 PM
A lot of wishful thinking unfortunately since the third movie hasn't even been greenlit. 

Pretty though.

I would think that with the money that the Dark Knight has made a sequel would be inevitable. 

As inevitable as the sun coming up in the morning, you're right. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Junkyard on August 15, 2008, 03:58:13 PM
CAP got a hold of this movie.

http://www.capalert.com/capreports/darkknight-the.htm (http://www.capalert.com/capreports/darkknight-the.htm)


They didn't create a new catagory for "Magic Tricks?" Seems unfair, and also unwise, as there WILL be copycats in upcoming movies.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 15, 2008, 04:06:57 PM
CAP got a hold of this movie.

http://www.capalert.com/capreports/darkknight-the.htm (http://www.capalert.com/capreports/darkknight-the.htm)

Gawd bless those puritanical loons

I surprised they didn't fond fault with The Passion ;D

I love how they find the most "offensive" movie they can to cite for Heath Ledger and that they miss the point entirely about the "why so serious" story, perhaps they had run screaming from the cinema before the other origin story came up and spent that portion of the film hyperventilating into a brown paper bag..
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Junkyard on August 15, 2008, 04:23:52 PM
Quote
The Joker is, of course, not responsible for his rampage of villainy and malfeasance. One must always understand that a bad daddy is the one responsible for his adult son's evil choices since the victim of a dysfunctional home never has a mind of his own. At least that is apparently what the Spocks and Frueds want us to believe.


I didn't read the article at first, but having done so-

Seriously, the "Why So Serious" thing was one of the most clever things I've ever seen a movie do against the audience!
You hear him give his schpeal, and you're like- "Oh, great- so the Joker's just a kid with a violent father. Thanks, movie." The thought retreats to the back of your mind as you watch the movie, and suddenly-
He gives another origin story.
A FICTIONAL CHARACTER GOT THE BETTER OF THE AUDIENCE. We were all rubes!

The reviewer didn't just miss the point, he missed the MOVIE.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 15, 2008, 04:25:58 PM
Exactly, which is why I think he must have been out of the theatre when that happened, in a foetal position, sobbing softly.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Junkyard on August 15, 2008, 04:37:25 PM
I actually just sent a heads up to him, trying to be as sympathetic and diplomatic as possible to point out that he basically missed an important bit of movie.

We'll see what happens with this.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 15, 2008, 04:40:42 PM
Oh if you get a response please do share.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Junkyard on August 15, 2008, 04:42:23 PM
10- 4, Tripe.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Keroppi20 on August 15, 2008, 05:22:00 PM
Hmm, according to CAP I am currently guilty of "sexual immorality", I better go change my shirt and take off my underwear  ;)  (adults in underwear... really?)
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: a pretty girl is like on August 15, 2008, 05:29:40 PM
CAP sins commited in this movie:

# fall with unconsciousness

Huh!?  Are they officially calling Harvey as being alive?  That's ballsy of them!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: esoobaC .T bocaJ on August 15, 2008, 06:28:14 PM
CAP sins commited in this movie:

# fall with unconsciousness

Huh!?  Are they officially calling Harvey as being alive?  That's ballsy of them!

well, to be fair, they weren't really paying attention
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Junkyard on August 15, 2008, 07:51:07 PM
Wow, can't fault him his response time. From a returned email-

Quote
That the writers were mocking the "father's fault" matter is why I 
did not bring it up that The Joker contradicted himself later.  And 
it was a perfect launch for letting people know that Spock admitted 
he was wrong.  And, though I didn't point it out (but might), 
together two versions of his family history gave meat to at least one 
parameter of the character of The Joker: that the truth is not in him.

Regarding following the plot, it is the lesser matter in our 
analyses.  I am not a movie critic nor will I ever be.  So, sometimes 
I am wrong about the plot, story, message, etc.  But then, if you 
have read the text of the
BEFORE You Read On..." link atop the Summary/Commentary, you'll 
understand why the "plot" is the lesser and maybe just the "necessary 
evil" parameter of our analysis methodology.

Thank you for your comments, Victor.

So he misrepresented the movie so he could rant about the shortcomings of modern parenting philosophy? And yet he'll ding a kid's movie if a character tells a white lie.
Also, he wants me to read a short novel's worth of explination and justification to understand why he'd do this.

At least he's polite enough.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Tripe on August 15, 2008, 08:40:04 PM

Wow, can't fault him his response time. From a returned email-

Quote
That the writers were mocking the "father's fault" matter is why I 
did not bring it up that The Joker contradicted himself later.  And 
it was a perfect launch for letting people know that Spock admitted 
he was wrong.  And, though I didn't point it out (but might), 
together two versions of his family history gave meat to at least one 
parameter of the character of The Joker: that the truth is not in him.

Regarding following the plot, it is the lesser matter in our 
analyses.  I am not a movie critic nor will I ever be.  So, sometimes 
I am wrong about the plot, story, message, etc.  But then, if you 
have read the text of the
BEFORE You Read On..." link atop the Summary/Commentary, you'll 
understand why the "plot" is the lesser and maybe just the "necessary 
evil" parameter of our analysis methodology.

Thank you for your comments, Victor.

So he misrepresented the movie so he could rant about the shortcomings of modern parenting philosophy? And yet he'll ding a kid's movie if a character tells a white lie.
Also, he wants me to read a short novel's worth of explination and justification to understand why he'd do this.

At least he's polite enough.


Yeah he's a mounmen...


Hmm, according to CAP I am currently guilty of "sexual immorality", I better go change my shirt and take off my underwear  ;)  (adults in underwear... really?)

Wait, what?


Er yeah, where was I?

Oh yes

...tal prick, albeit a courteous one
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Nuke Mayhem on August 15, 2008, 09:32:21 PM
Warning: Personal View Rant Coming



I'm sure you heard it from random people, co-workers, friends, family, and especially celebrities tiring to show they care but just sound stupid:

"Don't bring back the Joker!"

What I want to know is where did people get the idea that replacing the actor to play the Joker is insulting to Heath Ledger's memory as peeing over his grave site? Yes, Heath Ledger's death was very tragic and I pray for his family especially his little daughter, but the Joker was not his creation nor does he owns the rights to that character, it's Bob Kane's creation and is own by DC.

When someone says the word Batman, there are three characters that automatically comes to a person's mind in any random order after the dark knight himself: Robin, Bruce Wayne and the Joker. The Joker is Batman's greatest villain because he's the polar opposite to him and symbolizes why Bruce put on the cape and cowl in the first place to fight against: Chaos. He's also the villain that has the greatest chance to make batman "cross the line". Sure there were more powerful and dangerous villains in the Batman franchise that have wrecked Batman's world in ways the Joker can't, but being the very first criminal in the very first Batman comic Bob Kane wrote to help establish the Batman universe is something none of those other villains can ever top.

No disrespect to Heath but it would be a stupid move for Warner Brothers to wipe Joker from the movie series over his death. Heath was already working on a different movie during his death "The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus", months after he finished his work on The Dark Knight, so the movie isn't cursed nor pressured him to death. Can you think of any other character that can believably get under this movie-series-Batman's skin like the Joker and not be looked as overacting by Christian Bale? Sure Heath's performance in The Dark Night will most likely never be topped and anybody who says a different actor could of done better or they should bring back the Joker will probably get slap or spit in the face by everyone who heard that person, but there are still so many possibilities and roads for this character that can make great squeals (like a good look into his past of how he got messed up, meeting Harley Quinn, making Batman cross the line for real, and so-on), and you tell me we should close those roads over a death that isn't even the movie's fault?

The only thing these "Don't bring back the Joker" statements is doing is giving the WB a problem. Because if they do decide to bring back the Joker for a future sequel you know what will happen, there will be protesters boycotting the movie and Batman franchise, stupid celebrities talking as if the WB literally insulted the memory of Heath Ledger, crazy Christians saying how Batman and Joker are tools of the devil, and a bunch of other stupid crap that there's no good reason for.

Just want to get that off my chest but if you don't want to read all that, I'll just sum it up in 19 simple words:

Let Heath Ledger rest in peace, and let Wanner Brothers and DC Comics use the Joker for future movies!
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Junkyard on August 15, 2008, 09:47:40 PM
I still say "Don't Bring back the Joker," but more because I can't see it being done gracefully than any "respect for the dead" issues.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Nuke Mayhem on August 15, 2008, 10:00:49 PM
I still say "Don't Bring back the Joker," but more because I can't see it being done gracefully than any "respect for the dead" issues.
That's what I'm talking about, people seem to think bringing back the joker is a spit on Heath's Memory. They think it's saying "We don't give a damn about you, we just want our entertainment" but it's not. It's like a child who's dad died and doesn't want mommy to remarry because the child thinks it's like shoving his memory in the storage room or the trash. That's just how life is sometimes, we say our goodbyes to the ones we lost and move on.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: daltysmilth on August 15, 2008, 10:27:34 PM
Well, there's also the problem of if you bring back the Joker, how do you do it?  Any actor you brought in to play him would basically have two choices, try to replicate the way Heath Ledger do it, or go in a completely different direction from how he did it.  And either way, a lot of people wouldn't like it.  If he did it differently from Heath Ledger, people would be upset that he was doing it differently from Heath Ledger, if he tried to replicate Heath Ledger, people would criticize him for not bringing anything of his own to the role.  As for me, I do think they should bring the character back, but it would probably be best if they wait awhile.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Ortega on August 15, 2008, 10:27:42 PM
I think it more like this: Heath performance of the Joker was memorable and unique, that I don't see the possibility of bringing the character back at least in near future.  Maybe in a decade or so, but i think bringing the Joker back in three or five years with a new actor would be a pale imitation, or the actor would have to bring something different to the role. Which, oddly enough, is exactly what Ledger did.  I can recall a year ago when he was announced as The Joker, people crying heresy and such, claiming that Nicholson's Joker was unsurpassable.  I'm not saying that bringing back the Joker would be a bad move, i'm just saying they would have to do something new with him.   So basically, i don't see them bringing Joker back, at least while Nolan's at the helm. 
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: Nuke Mayhem on August 16, 2008, 12:06:51 AM
I would wait after one or two sequels before bringing back the Joker, let the Riddler or whatever villain they use to quiet down the "Ban the Joker" rage and give people time to finish their grieving for Heath. Then when the time is right, bring back the Joker in the sequels where he now obsessed in proving Batman wrong about what he said when caught him at the end of "The Dark Night", by making Batman crack and become a maniac like him.

I even know the perfect way to bring him back.
First: At the end of the sequel before the one joker returns, after the credits, the screen shows the psychiatrist Harley Quinn (no clear view of her) walking down a hall of cells at Arkam with a security guard holding a shotgun, they stops at one. The guard yells "Paitent #5083 (or some random number), you have a visitor please sit on the floor at the back of the cell", the prisoner does what he says and the guard opens the door. Both the Harley and Guard walk into the cell and we see the prisoner in a prisoner's uniform and in a straight jacket sitting on the floor with head tilted down, all you can see is his light brown hair. Harley bends down to get closer to him, ignoring the guard's warnings. The prisoner lifts his head and it's Joker without his face paint on but you can tell it's him by the cut marks on the sides of his mouth and his messy hair. Harley says "Hello Mr. Joker, lets have a talk." The Joker grins and the screen goes to black.

Second: In the new joker sequel we find out Harley is a very controversial psychiatrist, and people of Gotham are not happy that the Joker's being treated a disturbed victim and wants him executed. Harley has been having sessions with the Joker for a little over a month now and he's been seducing her into believing he's a victim of an abusive father and framing vigilant, and starts to fall in love with him. When Harley finds out the mayor is going to give the people what they want and scheduled Joker's execution, she breaks him out of Arkam on his execution day and agrees to help him show the world that Batman is the real psychotic monster and it was his fault for what happened in "The Dark Night" (in reality, he wants to drive Batman over the edge and turn him into a maniac like himself). In return, the Joker agrees (with his fingers crossed behind his back) to marry her and raise a family.
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: MrTorso on August 16, 2008, 08:06:01 AM
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o255/MrTorso/boner_2.gif)-
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (SPOILERS)
Post by: gbeenie on August 16, 2008, 09:44:40 AM
It's so monumentally over the top the tongue has to be jammed into the cheek.


I'd let him jam his tongue into my cheek.

Ew.  That seems like it would hurt.  What I'm saying is I'd like to have sex with him.

Oh, you just want Gwyneth Paltrow to have your clothes cleaned and pressed for you (hey; some fetishes are really specific).
Title: Re: The Dark Knight (S