The Dark Knight

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

I got Imax tickets...even though I'm not really a fan of sitting in the IMax theater.

 

I wanted to see it on there once though...since I'm sure I'll be going to see it again in a regular theater later.

[Frosty 0]

I just got this website in my e-mail..... it actually arrived a few hours ago and I was at work.

 

http://www.whysoserious.com/kickingandscreening

 

There is a link to free IMAX tickets in several cities, but from what I can see, they are all taken.

[AmericanDragon 0]

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hmTgXYn7wY

[Atticus Chaos 0]

It's a comic book movie. What do you expect? Besides, I always did enjoy that telling of that origin because it happened to him against his will (in some versions), thus creating or more likely bringing out his insanity plus it would've worked perfectly for Heath Ledger's Joker because realistically the chemical burns would've scarred his face.

 

You can't just say 'its a comic book movie' and then use that to excuse every ridiculous plot device in comic book films. There should always be some realism there. That's the difference between Batman Begins and Batman and Robin. One movie tries to be gritty and realistic, and the other just accepts its a pantomine. And which movie is better?

 

And seriously, if Heath Ledger ended up falling into a tub of dangerous chemicals in the dark knight, you'd probably be able to hear the collective groan in cinema's across the land.

 

You could maybe suspend your disbelief and believe you have a Billionaire vigilante going around a crime ridden city kicking ass, and that he has all these cool gadgets, and stuff. But that a guy can fall into vat of dangerous chemicals, and emerge perfectly fine, apart from a messed up complextion? That's a bit more difficult.

 

 

 

 

No, that would've been awful. I'm glad they changed it.

 

I don't think the happy ending really suits the film. If she'd died, it would have emboldened Batman and drove him on. The sequel's better because you don't have the copout ending.

[Lil' Bitch 0]

You could maybe suspend your disbelief and believe you have a Billionaire vigilante going around a crime ridden city kicking ass, and that he has all these cool gadgets, and stuff. But that a guy can fall into vat of dangerous chemicals, and emerge perfectly fine, apart from a messed up complextion? That's a bit more difficult.

 

Well, its better than Nolan using The Red Hood. I'm just picky about directors / writers changing origins unless its sensical / easier to believe or its from the Ultimate universe.

 

And I don't mind realism, but if Nolan is strict about it, then it takes some of the fun out of the source material. Because of his beliefs, we won't be getting the Penguin and we probably won't be getting Poison Ivy, Mr. Freeze, Croc (thank God for Gotham Knight on that one), or Clayface in the future sequels as long as he is involved. I mean those are some of Batman's best villains!

 

And seriously, if Heath Ledger ended up falling into a tub of dangerous chemicals in the dark knight, you'd probably be able to hear the collective groan in cinema's across the land.

 

Nah, Nolan is going with the Joker's debut in the comics where he showed up as is without an explaination so there's no vat fall although with Ledger's face all fucked up, the accident COULD have happened and its smart for Nolan to have done that so he wouldn't have to reshoot the scene from back then.

 

I don't think the happy ending really suits the film. If she'd died, it would have emboldened Batman and drove him on.

 

I always enjoyed the Batman ending. Him standing on the rooftop looking at the Bat signal with Elfman's epic song playing IMO is just as iconic as Christopher Reeve flying in space smiling at the camera. You're telling me the Joker was just going to spend all that time going up the stairs only to push to Vicki off the roof? I don't see how Batman was going to end had Vale been killed.

 

I see where you're coming from, but the depressing ending would've worked better for a female character made up just for the movie since it wouldn't piss off fans as much. Had they done that to Nicole Kidman in Batman Forever, that would've been cool!

[ANKLELOCK 0]

If this movie gets nominated for best picture I'll eat my foot. It's a big budget summer popcorn flick. I liked the first one, too

 

Overhype machine is in hyperdrive.

 

I wonder what people will be saying about Ironman II.

[Anakin Flair 0]

And I don't mind realism, but if Nolan is strict about it, then it takes some of the fun out of the source material. Because of his beliefs, we won't be getting the Penguin and we probably won't be getting Poison Ivy, Mr. Freeze, Croc (thank God for Gotham Knight on that one), or Clayface in the future sequels as long as he is involved. I mean those are some of Batman's best villains!

 

I think Nolan is only doing one more (with Two-Face). But I think they can use a couple of the more far-out-there villians. The current incarnation of the Penguin could beleivably be pulled off (the debonair, yet short club owner that caters to the underworld). Poison Ivy could be done more simplisticly as a woman who uses chemiclay-infused products to seduce and kill, and who is also a eco-terrorist of sorts. They can do the Black Mask, they can do Scarface (but only as a comic relief, 5-minute cameo type villian. Guys like Clayface, Mr. Freeze, and Killer Crock probably wont be seeing the big screen though, I agree.

 

Something I would like to see is Oracle- but the only way I think we would see that is if they cut out her whole background as Batgirl.

[AmericanDragon 0]

http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2008/07/11/dark-...exclusive-clip/

[Anakin Flair 0]

awesome.

[CBright7831 0]

"He's going to need something alot bigger to get through this."

*cuts to Joker grabbing a bazooka*

 

Speaking to soon?

[Atticus Chaos 0]

And I don't mind realism, but if Nolan is strict about it, then it takes some of the fun out of the source material. Because of his beliefs, we won't be getting the Penguin and we probably won't be getting Poison Ivy, Mr. Freeze, Croc (thank God for Gotham Knight on that one), or Clayface in the future sequels as long as he is involved. I mean those are some of Batman's best villains!

 

I think Nolan is only doing one more (with Two-Face). But I think they can use a couple of the more far-out-there villians. The current incarnation of the Penguin could beleivably be pulled off (the debonair, yet short club owner that caters to the underworld). Poison Ivy could be done more simplisticly as a woman who uses chemiclay-infused products to seduce and kill, and who is also a eco-terrorist of sorts. They can do the Black Mask, they can do Scarface (but only as a comic relief, 5-minute cameo type villian. Guys like Clayface, Mr. Freeze, and Killer Crock probably wont be seeing the big screen though, I agree.

 

Something I would like to see is Oracle- but the only way I think we would see that is if they cut out her whole background as Batgirl.

 

I could see Poison Ivy being reimagined as a terrorist, and the Penguin is actually one of the more believable characters (but Nolan is probably put off by the Danny Devito portrayal in batman returns). They don't want to do catwoman either.

 

They could just make up villains as well: Max Shreck was created solely for Batman returns and he was one of the better villains in the series, I thought.

[Anakin Flair 0]

Why wouldn't they want to do Catwoman? I'd think she be a perfect villian for the Nolan-verse.

[Atticus Chaos 0]

Why wouldn't they want to do Catwoman? I'd think she be a perfect villian for the Nolan-verse.

 

One of the writers did an interview a couple of days ago and said they're weren't doing her or penguin. Maybe they feel she's been overexposed, I doubt that atrocious Catwoman movie helped and they might think the character's been tainted a bit.

[Nighthawk 0]

Plus I actually think the Michelle Pfieffer version was sort of untouchably good.

[Anakin Flair 0]

Both good reasons. I'd actually forgot about the Catwoman movie, as I never really considered it to be the real Catwoman anyway.

[AmericanDragon 0]

Roeper's review

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UELDTKPC-lo

[Nightwing 0]

If this movie gets nominated for best picture I'll eat my foot. It's a big budget summer popcorn flick. I liked the first one, too

 

Overhype machine is in hyperdrive.

 

I wonder what people will be saying about Ironman II.

 

See, the funny part is that every critic who has seen it so far seems to completely disagree with you. In fact, the Newsweek reviewer actually said that he was a bit disappointed that it wasn't more like that. You're using the exact same reasoning that Czech did earlier (Comic Book Movie = Popcorn Flick with limited Depth), and the people who have seen the movie are saying you're wrong.

 

Just because it's a comic book movie doesn't mean it has to be a popcorn flick.

[Atticus Chaos 0]

Titanic was basically a popcorn movie. Its probably the most shallow film to ever win best picture. The script for that film is terrible. You'd think if that can sweep the board, the dark knight could at least be under consideration.

[Darthtiki 0]

I just got this website in my e-mail..... it actually arrived a few hours ago and I was at work.

 

http://www.whysoserious.com/kickingandscreening

 

There is a link to free IMAX tickets in several cities, but from what I can see, they are all taken.

 

Apparently, my buddy was quick on the draw and scored a pair and we're going

[Lil' Bitch 0]

Harvey Dent Interview

[spiny norman 0]

I've seen this.

 

It's good, but is so thematically rich that I can't help but rich some of the themes had been developed further. Likewise, in drawing two great characters in Joker and Harvey Dent, Bruce Wayne/Batman seems almost relegated to the sidelines - I think he could've used a bit more character development.

 

Nevertheless, excellent film, and leagues better than (the really very good) Batman Begins, which basically feels like child's play next to this.

[ANKLELOCK 0]

You mean, it's not the greatest movie of all time? It won't win 45 academy awards?

[DarKnight 0]

I really don't know how much The Dark Knight will make the opening weekend. I don't think it matters really, since it will make a shitload of money regardless. It could either make $150M or $160M, yet it could just make a little more than Iron Man, since there is more stuff out. I really want it to break Spider-Man 3's record though, since I thought that movie was terrible.

[bob_barron 0]

You mean, it's not the greatest movie of all time? It won't win 45 academy awards?

 

He did say it was an excellent film.

 

ReelViews gave it ****, but the New Yorker and New York magazine both gave negative reviews

[Nightwing 0]

You mean, it's not the greatest movie of all time? It won't win 45 academy awards?

 

Of course, considering his biggest complaint is that it is so "thematically rich" that it basically left him wanting more, it doesn't seem that it is the "big budget popcorn flick" you pigeonholed it into. You should probably quit this thread while you are still ahead.

 

It's really odd that 3 of the 4 critics giving it a bad review are from New York. The New Yorker's review was probably the review I respected most, mostly because it seemed to actually identify what it disliked. The Star and Time Out, New York were too brief to take seriously, and the New York Magazine one was just way too far up its own ass. "Scarier than what the Joker does to anyone onscreen is what Ledger must have been doing to himself—trying to find the center of a character without a dream of one." Really? Really? This isn't even restricted to the Dark Knight; just writing that sentence (which is typical of most of his review) makes me want to punch that guy. Talk about pretentiousness...

[Hawkius Maximus 0]

Reelviews is the critic I read and trust the most. So him giving it ****, his highest grade and all the praise he did is pretty amazing. He doesn't give out that grade very often. He flat out calls the movie possibly the greatest since ROTK. That's some high praise.

[PUT THAT DICK IN MY MOUTH! 0]

He flat out calls the movie possibly the greatest since ROTK. That's some high praise.

 

There's so many things wrong with this that I don't even know where to begin.

[HollywoodSpikeJenkins 0]

"Scarier than what the Joker does to anyone onscreen is what Ledger must have been doing to himself—trying to find the center of a character without a dream of one."

 

 

That's awesome.

[ANKLELOCK 0]

Yes it is, and, for the record, I liked BB and will surely like this one, I just wanted to be a contrarian to the overhype that is going on now. I understand the excitement, I just like to be a dick sometimes.

[DarKnight 0]

Yeah, The Dark Knight has been overhyped, but from what I've heard, it lives up to it. I'm glad that Nolan's Batman movies are based off of The Long Halloween, since that is my favorite Batman story. It seems that a lot of themes in these movies are in that book.