Jump to content

The Dark Knight


Arsh
 Share

Recommended Posts

In Red, + comments -

I quote Noeland because his thoughts mirror my own for the most part.

 

OK, finally saw it, and really I need to see it again before I can review it. It was a BIG movie with lots of characters and lots of things going on all the time.

 

I liked it, a lot. I didn't like that Batman had to become Daredevil to find The Joker. Right down to the way the sonar FX footage looked. It looked exactly the same as Daredevil's "radar vision" from that film. That was a letdown that far into the film.

 

It was a pretty relentless flick, with maybe too big of a scope for it's own good. The second half of the flick was a little all over the place in the way it moved the story forward, but that's a nitpick really.

 

I don't think it's a nitpick. It's a well placed observation, and it's a fair statement from my perception.

 

 

This was truly a GREAT film, and as a sequel sets the bar higher than I think any modern sequel ever has.

 

The Two Towers, Hellboy II, MI3?. And I have to think Quantum of Solace will challenge as well.

Now I'm nitpicking ;) or at the very least throwing semantics into the pot. Still, I think these modern sequels rate.

 

What can I say about Ledger? It was a legendary performance. He had all the best scenes, all the best lines. The movie may as well have been called "The Joker takes Gotham". The film was written to his ends. He got the best of everyone in it more than once, and he always seemed to have the upper hand. In spite of logic, common sense, time and space, and really even in spite of the movies interests. I mean, who can transport that many 50 gallon drums all over Gotham? ;)

 

Heath was amazing. No question.

 

That was both good and bad for me, as I prefer a much more driven, focused, stalwart Batman to the emotionally stunted Batman we got. Batman does not get overcome by dogs.

 

I think one of the major issues for me was the ending. Not the things that happened, but the order in which they happened. I really feel that ending with Dent instead of The Joker was a mistake. He opened the flick, he should have ended it too.

 

Can't argue with that.

 

The stuff with the boats, the stuff going on inside the boats. Meh. Hated most of that stuff. Felt contrived and out of place. I would have liked the stakes of that confrontation to be personal, not about boats full of people. I mean to a certain extent they were personal.

 

This had me a bit chuffed too.

 

Anyway, I'm just doing the geek shuffle by nitpicking at the movie. It was an amazing flick that I will enjoy watching again and again and again. In fact, maybe tomorrow.

 

:)

 

Loved seeing some recognizable Chicago actors showing up.

The Bat voice . . . I can understand why they want to distance BW from Bats, but this just isn't working for me.

The cowl. From some angles it looks pretty cool. Mostly when it's lit well and we get shadow. The rest of the time it looks fat-headed and awkward, especially with overall lighting - looking at the face dead on. Maybe a nitpick, but it makes our hero look like he's got a wicked case of the mumps ;)

I have to say Ledger surprised me. Not that I thought he wouldn't be good. He was just better than I had hoped.

I'm happy and warmed by the fact that he went out on such a high note.

 

- TB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 490
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I just saw the movie and I agree with all the accolades given to it. Heath Ledger was absolutely amazing, but I think Aaron Eckhart deserves equal applause for his role as well. To me the movie was much more about the Joker and Two Face than about Batman to the point I would almost suggest that Harvey Dent was the protagonist. Maggie Gyllenhaal filling in for Rachel Dawes was easy to accept, since I was about as committed to that character as much as she was to Bruce Wayne.

 

I really feel like I need to see it again, since I don't know that I was able to digest all the subtle complexities going on. It seemed to have a series of related philosophical references that were quickly merged together, hidden under the action and drama. I really enjoy stories that play with the idea of "what is right or wrong?", "is entropy a negative force?", and "is humanity inherently good or evil?" All of these concepts I believe are key to the legend of the Dark Knight, but I have to be careful saying that, since I haven't read any of the comics.

 

Still I think the movie continually touched on these ideas, but went through them so quickly, that I never felt I was given the opportunity to feel the depth of the point. I unlike many enjoyed the Matrix Trilogy simply for the exercise in "Determinism" vs. "Free Will", but that single thought was the focus through three movies, giving enough time to run through the concept with some pretty good eye-candy to go along with it. That being said, I think three movies is in general a bit excessive for most to bother with complex thought, when we are really just going out for general entertainment.

 

I think rather that the Dark Knight should have been split into two movies. Maybe focusing on the Joker and ending right when Harvey Dent was maimed and Rachel Dawes was killed. I think it would have been great to leave the theater with the same feeling that Empire Strikes Back gave when the galaxy went dark with little or no hope of recovery, yet maintaining excitement for the next movie.

 

I felt that even in the beginning the movie rushed through the details just to make the story plausible. The scene with Cillian Murphy/Scarecrow was very disappointing to me since I really enjoyed him in the first movie. I believe it would have been better to have skipped him altogether rather than relegate an interesting character to insignificance.

 

Please don't turn off the flashlight... I don't want to fall.

Mike

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think rather that the Dark Knight should have been split into two movies.

 

I was saying the same thing after the film, standing in the parking lot.

Not in a detrimental type of way . . . More a case of, I felt they tried to pack so much into that 2.5 hours that it easily could have maintained itself across two films and been less harried. This doesn't detract from me having enjoyed what we were given. I think the whole hostages on the boat thing might have worked better for me had it been set up a little bit. The Two-Face transformation, Dent going from good to insanely evil might have benefitted from a less break-neck build too. Nitpicky? Sure.

 

And for fans of 80's/90's oddball action fare . . . How cool was it to see "Tiny" Lister (on the prison barge) show up as the convict who makes the humanitarian choice against type? Most of you might remember him as the President from The 5th Element.

 

I agree that Aaron Eckhart was very good in this picture, but let's not get all Christy Brown on him ;)

 

Scarecrow, yes . . . That could have been played with more.

 

- TB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was saying the same thing after the film, standing in the parking lot.

Not in a detrimental type of way . . . More a case of, I felt they tried to pack so much into that 2.5 hours that it easily could have maintained itself across two films and been less harried. This doesn't detract from me having enjoyed what we were given. I think the whole hostages on the boat thing might have worked better for me had it been set up a little bit. The Two-Face transformation, Dent going from good to insanely evil might have benefitted from a less break-neck build too. Nitpicky? Sure.

 

And for fans of 80's/90's oddball action fare . . . How cool was it to see "Tiny" Lister (on the prison barge) show up as the convict who makes the humanitarian choice against type? Most of you might remember him as the President from The 5th Element.

 

- TB

 

Yeah, with Dent they could have at least played up the coin flip a little more, I think they only show him do it once before he became Two-Face.

 

I'll say it again, the thing that roped me about Ledger's performance was the dark comedy he brought to it.

 

It was cool seeing Tiny Lister (Deebo!), also I noticed Nicky Katt was the other SWAT officer driving Dent, that was a cool one. Oh, and I swear Casper Van Diem was in the parking garage at the beginning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Turns out the Studio's estimate for Dark Knight's weekend numbers was off.

 

Heath Ledger's epic crime drama made $158.5 Million!!!

 

$3 Million more than the original reported box office gross.

 

IRON MAN has been beaten to a bloody disgusting pulp ($102 Million).

 

Heath Ledger isn't done kicking ass though, I'm predicting an Academy Award Nomination and Win for Best Actor along with a new record in Overall Domestic Box Office Gross to top Sony and Marvel's SPIDER MAN.

 

heathledger42tb1.jpg

 

-TL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wanted the film to end differently, that's what I wanted.

I wanted it to show the rope that the Joker was hanging from cut with the rope blowing in the breeze. Then the screen cut to black and all you hear is his laugh echo through the theater. That would've given me chills.

 

I'll do a magic trick. I'll make this pencil...disappear.

 

 

JO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wanted the film to end differently, that's what I wanted.

I wanted it to show the rope that the Joker was hanging from cut with the rope blowing in the breeze. Then the screen cut to black and all you hear is his laugh echo through the theater. That would've given me chills.

 

I'll do a magic trick. I'll make this pencil...disappear.

JO

 

I would have liked to have seen Joker laughing like an asshole in Arkham. That would have been a great way to end it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arsh, Ledger is the star of the film.

 

If a Nomination takes place, it'll be for Best Actor.

 

The title is misleading.

 

Heath has as much screentime as Bale and possibly more.

 

Also, because only one actor from the film is likely to get Nominated (unlike Gladiator's Russell Crowe and Joaquin Phoenix) It'll be Best Actor off the bat.

 

*In 1967 Rod Steiger won Best Actor for In The Heat Of The Night - he was credited as the antagonist of the piece when in fact he plays a racist cop that has a change of heart half way into the film.

 

He was billed 2nd.

 

-TL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arsh, Ledger is the star of the film.

 

If a Nomination takes place, it'll be for Best Actor.

 

The title is deceiving.

 

Heath has as much screentime as Bale and possibly more.

 

Also, because only one actor from the film is likely to get Nominated (unlike Gladiator's Russell Crowe and Joaquin Phoenix) It'll be Best Actor off the bat.

 

*In 1967 Rod Steiger won Best Actor for In The Heat Of The Night - he was credited as the antagonist of the piece when in fact he plays a racist cop that has a change of heart half way into the film.

 

He was billed 2nd.

 

-TL

 

Uh... didn't Ledger have the least amount of screen time of the three protagonists, Bruce Wayne, Harvey Dent, and The Joker?

 

I mean, between Best Actor and Best Supporting, I would think it would make more sense that he'd win Best Supporting Actor. The movie is called The Dark Knight, not The Killing Joke

 

I mean, I'm a hundred percent sure that Ledger will definitely receive a nomination. And he oughta win, his performance was fantastic. But Best Actor would go to the principal protagonist, in this case Bruce Wayne were Bale nominated.

 

Heath, while one of the best parts of this film (probably THE best part), will probably get a Best Supporting Actor nomination. Aaron Eckhart's performance was also fantastic, and he too would most likely be nominated for Best Supporting. Most likely, only Christian Bale would get a Best Actor nom (if he were being nominated).

 

There is no way Ledger had more screen time than Bale.

 

But if Ledger doesn't win the Oscar, then Hollywood has lost all its credibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why because he died? It was a great performance, it was a great performance there's no doubt about it, but if he was still alive do think there would be all this talk of an Oscar nomination?

 

Not because he died. Because he's fucking brilliant as The Joker.

 

If he were alive, I'd still be saying he deserves an Oscar. It's an amazing performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arsh man, the fact that you even mentioned Bale and Eckhart getting Nominated shows you're unfamiliar with the A.M.P.A.S.

 

First off, both those actors don't stand a chance at getting a nomination. Not even a Golden Globe.

 

Bale was VERY unimportant and several of Hollywood's top critics are simply leaving him out of their reviews of The Dark Knight.

 

Not to say he was bad - but completely upstaged.

 

The person being talked about is the guy that REALLY went all the way - which is what it takes to get recognized.

 

Unlike Josh Brolin in No Country For Old Men, Bale did not deliver a brilliant performance that got stepped on by someone else in the film.

 

You keep saying how Bale is "The principal protagonist".

 

He is clearly not Dude and we all see it.

 

The film woulda been better off being called The Killing Joke.

 

*Also, Ledger and Bale BOTH have 16 scenes in the film, some where they both appear in. And must I remind you the film opens with The Joker?

 

I predicted both Bardem's and Lewis's wins this year. I predict Heath's and it'll be Best Actor.

 

*Mike, Ledger got his statue ONE MONTH BEFORE he died - when the Teaser Trailer hit.

 

That's when the buzz started.

 

-TL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arsh man, the fact that you even mentioned Bale and Eckhart getting Nominated shows you're unfamiliar with the A.M.P.A.S.

 

First off, both those actors don't stand a chance at getting a nomination. Not even a Golden Globe.

 

Bale was VERY unimportant and several of Hollywood's top critics are simply leaving him out of their reviews of The Dark Knight.

 

Not to say he was bad - but completely upstaged.

 

The person being talked about is the guy that REALLY went all the way - which is what it takes to get recognized.

 

Unlike Josh Brolin in No Country For Old Men, Bale did not deliver a brilliant performance that got stepped on by someone else in the film.

 

You keep saying how Bale is "The principal protagonist".

 

He is clearly not Dude and we all see it.

 

The film woulda been better off being called The Killing Joke.

 

*Also, Ledger and Bale BOTH have 16 scenes in the film, some where they both appear in. And must I remind you the film opens with The Joker?

 

I predicted both Bardem's and Lewis's wins this year. I predict Heath's and it'll be Best Actor.

 

*Mike, Ledger got his statue ONE MONTH BEFORE he died - when the Teaser Trailer hit.

 

That's when the buzz started.

 

-TL

Yes! The Killing Joke

 

COMIC_batman_the_killing_joke.jpg

 

 

JO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arsh man, the fact that you even mentioned Bale and Eckhart getting Nominated shows you're unfamiliar with the A.M.P.A.S.

 

First off, both those actors don't stand a chance at getting a nomination. Not even a Golden Globe.

No, no, no... I didn't say they were getting nominated. They did great work, but they aren't getting nominated. I meant to say if they were to be nominated. I just wanted to give an example from the same film. I guess it didn't come out how I wanted it to in the previous post. Though I think Eckhart isn't getting the attention he should, because he did extremely well in the role of Harvey Dent.

 

Bale was VERY unimportant and several of Hollywood's top critics are simply leaving him out of their reviews of The Dark Knight.

 

Not to say he was bad - but completely upstaged.

 

The person being talked about is the guy that REALLY went all the way - which is what it takes to get recognized.

 

Unlike Josh Brolin in No Country For Old Men, Bale did not deliver a brilliant performance that got stepped on by someone else in the film.

 

You keep saying how Bale is "The principal protagonist".

 

Story-wise, I believe that Bale is the principal protagonist, along with Harvey Dent, while The Joker is the antagonist for both of them.

 

He is clearly not Dude and we all see it.

 

The film woulda been better off being called The Killing Joke.

 

Thing is, The Joker isn't the main protagonist. He is the main antagonist though. The Joker is a catalyst for the rest of the characters of the film.

 

*Also, Ledger and Bale BOTH have 16 scenes in the film, some where they both appear in. And must I remind you the film opens with The Joker?

 

I recall Bale having more screen time than Ledger.

 

I predicted both Bardem's and Lewis's wins this year. I predict Heath's and it'll be Best Actor.

 

I say Ledger wins as well, but Best Supporting, and not Best Actor. Similar to Bardem's win from the last one.

 

*Mike, Ledger got his statue ONE MONTH BEFORE he died - when the Teaser Trailer hit.

 

That's when the buzz started.

 

-TL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest AdminGuyX

Ledger is one of the 3 starring leads in the film, so I would imagine Best Actor, very much the way Denzel Washington won for Training Day, as best actor, even though he was the villian of the piece, he was still one of it's leads.

 

Protagonist, antagonist . . . that stuff doesn't matter with the oscars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well... it is an ensemble crime drama.

 

Alright, I'll bite. If he gets nominated for a Best Actor, that is fine with me. Though in my personal opinion, I think it'll be a Best Supporting Actor, but I'm hoping for a Best Actor one (along with a WIN)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arsh, something else I've noticed you failed to see (surprisingly), is that the film isn't a battle between The Joker and Batman.

 

Its The Joker vs Gotham.

 

Noeland really nailed it with that mock title "The Joker takes Gotham"

 

The Joker is a force of one while Gotham is a force of many (Dent, Batman, Gordon, The Mayor, etc.)

 

Burton's film is clearly a duel between the two, having a personal connection.

 

People may have expected Batman to be the main man in this film, but I think Nolan kicked them in the nuts with the finished product.

 

The Trailers DID revolve around The Joker so that was the sign I guess.

 

The title must have been pure marketing. No campaign coulda been launched to represent the antagonist as the center of the film. Fans of Batman Begins (not having seen the first Trailer) would have said "What the fuck?".

 

The same goes for the film's rating. TONS of critics are telling parents to keep the 8-year-olds home and prepare for a serious film and NOT a comic book film.

 

Tim Bradstreet did not embrace Ledger as the rest of us did following the first Trailer and I know it has alot to do with his respect for Bale and the first film.

 

It was supposed to be a Batman film, but Nolan felt like making a Joker film. After all, he already made a Batman film.

 

*I saw these online earlier and they are fucking cool...

 

joker1yc3.jpgjoker2wc4.jpg

 

-TL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arsh, something else I've noticed you failed to see (surprisingly), is that the film isn't a battle between The Joker and Batman.

 

Its The Joker vs Gotham.

 

Noeland really nailed it with that mock title "The Joker takes Gotham"

 

The Joker is a force of one while Gotham is a force of many (Dent, Batman, Gordon, The Mayor, etc.)

 

I never saw it as a battle of The Joker vs. Gotham. I just saw it as Anarchy vs. Order. The Joker is a representation of something that everyone in society fears, lawlessness, anarchy, chaos. Without rules and laws, that is what everyone else would become. It wasn't one man against a city. It was a battle of ideology. Batman is trying to preserve order, because he thinks that is the best way for people to survive. The Joker wants to destroy order and replace it with chaos, because he thinks that's the best way to live. He even says to Harvey... "The thing about chaos... it's fair.

 

Burton's film is clearly a duel between the two, having a personal connection.

 

People may have expected Batman to be the main man in this film, but I think Nolan kicked them in the nuts with the finished product.

 

Thing is, I don't think The Joker is the most important part of the film. Batman, Dent, and The Joker are all equally important and represent different things.

 

The Trailers DID revolve around The Joker so that was the sign I guess.

 

Only cause The Joker is fucking cool.

 

The title must have been pure marketing. No campaign coulda been launched to represent the antagonist as the center of the film. Fans of Batman Begins (not having seen the first Trailer) would have said "What the fuck?".

 

The same goes for the film's rating. TONS of critics are telling parents to keep the 8-year-olds home and prepare for a serious film and NOT a comic book film.

 

I agree with you. This is not a film for young kids. I refused to take my six year old brother despite the fact he loves Batman. But Batman and The Joker were always intended to be serious characters by Bob Kane.

 

Tim Bradstreet did not embrace Ledger as the rest of us did following the first Trailer and I know it has alot to do with his respect for Bale and the first film.

 

It was supposed to be a Batman film, but Nolan felt like making a Joker film. After all, he already made a Batman film.

 

He didn't make a Joker film, or a Batman film.

 

He made a Gotham film.

 

He made a film about crime, about anarchy vs. chaos. About three very different men and the three different paths they choose. They all... seem to be chasing after something fair. Batman wants a fair world for innocent people to live in and fair justice. Harvey too wanted that, but through legal means. Two Face believed that chance is the only fair justice. And The Joker believes that the only way people can live "fairly" is through anarchy and chaos. He wants to expose people's hypocrisies. He believes in destruction... and the thing about total destruction, is that it is fair. It forces everyone to fight at the same level. The Joker doesn't care about money or power. He just wants to destroy everything that is in order.

 

That's my personal view of it anyway.

 

*I saw these online earlier and they are fucking cool...

 

joker1yc3.jpgjoker2wc4.jpg

 

I WANT THAT FIRST SHIRT.

 

-TL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah that tee is fuckin sick!!!

 

But Arsh YOU KNOW you would wear "I kill the bus driver." on a day when the other one is dirty.

 

They oughtta make one with The Joker's mask that says "Whatever doesn't kill you makes you stranger."

 

*I just remembered Anthony Hopkins got Best Actor in 1991 for Silence Of The Lambs by playing an antagonist with 30 minutes of screen time.

 

Heath's got 4 times the screen time he had and his co-star (Bale) won't be getting Nominated like that year's Best Actress Jodie Foster.

 

-TL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest AdminGuyX

Oh, I think he made a Batman film alright. Every scene is ulimately about Batman whether he is on screen or not. Tell me one single scene in the film that wasn't about the bat even if he wasn't in the frame. The story always came back around to the dark knight. But, I still contend that the story could have worked without him just fine. Odd, huh? Kind of chaotic even.

 

I just can't get over the production artwork. I mean HOLY BATSHIT BATMAN. That is some of the coolest work Sienkiewicz has ever done.

 

It needs to be on shirts.

 

I love the pencil scene too, and that shirt is very cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Nominees are announced in December where 10 actors will go through the elimination round (Golden Globes).

 

The 5 people that make it, go on to the big one month later - The Academy Awards.

 

Well Noeland,

 

-The Bank Robbery intro was all about stealing from the mob to make a point and not at all about Batman.

 

-The "Why So Serious?" scene is all about Joker's lie on the origin of his scars and the murder of Gamble - the man who put a hit on him. Not at all about Batman.

 

-The "I just want my phone call." scene at the detention cell where The Joker is being guarded by the pissed off cop is not at all about Batman.

 

-The "This is my city now." scene focuses on The Joker declaring to the Czech he's taking over and then the hit he puts on Wayne's accountant. Not at all about Batman.

 

In other scenes he just mentions Bats.

 

LEADING MONSTER

 

heathledgerjoker223rf0.jpg

 

-TL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...