The Dark Knight

[StarOpal]

Oh, wow. Love. Love! Definite buy. To me, it's better than the first.

Heath Ledger is officially my favorite Joker, by leaps and bounds. "I can make this pencil disappear." Awesome.

Maggie Gyllenhall (sp?) is a vast improvement over Katie Holmes.

It was also my first midnight show and, except for the tequila soaked heavy breathing creepo who was leering at me most of the movie (seriously he reeked of the stuff and my brothers had to keep giving "back off" looks), I had a great time.

EDIT: Oh, and the Watchmen trailer looks great.

[eatmyshorts]

I saw it 10 AM at the imax this morning... boy, was it outstanding. Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker is for sure the best this year, and he really made the movie. It had a great story, great cast, great action, and most of all...great job!

[RobOfTheDead]

Did they show the trailer for Half-Blood Prince?

[TheOogieBoogieMan]

Jul 18, 2008 16:01:22 GMT -5 RobOfTheDead said:

Did they show the trailer for Half-Blood Prince?

Not in my theatre.


Two things I have to say against this movie:

1. Christian Bale's "Batman" voice is REALLY annoying. Ok, so you have to disguise yourself in every regard, but it gets counter-productive (and unintimidating) when you constantly have to stop mid-sentence to regain your breath. And whyyyyy does he have to put the voice on around Lucius Fox? There's no point trying to fool him, Bruce!

2. The same problem I had with movies like Iron Man and Hellboy 2...after getting to know such interesting characters and being involved so deeply in the drama of the story, the punch-punch-kick-kick climax just didn't do it for me. Batman (or Iron Man, or Hellboy) is obviously going to come out on top, and no amount of fisticuffs or "is he down for the count?" fake-out moments is going to give the climax a sense of danger. That said, Batman does have the upper hand over those other two movies because of the tangibility of the fighting and car chases, as opposed to having to sit through ten minutes of one CGI-person duking it out with another CGI-person.

Those two issues aside...this was very good. Probably the most accurate depiction of what a world with superheroes and villains would be like. Heath Ledger was great, and even Aaron Eckhart (who was as dull as dishwater on Conan O'Brien last night, and has been getting relatively few nods in the reviews I've read) impressed me. Not perfect (see above) but damn good.

[TheOogieBoogieMan]

A little post-script re: Heath Ledger: I have his imdb page open, where pictures of him in make-up from the movie sit right beside a picture of him without make-up, looking all normal-like. Looking at this page makes me realize just how great the guy was in this movie. Not only is it hard to connect this rendition of the Joker to his characters in A Knight's Tale or 10 Things I Hate About You, but it's hard to connect the character to Ledger himself. The Joker, as a character, really is an island unto himself, not resembling the actor playing him in any way (not in his voice or mannerisms, or even in appearance!), which says a lot about his performance.

I want to watch The Dark Knight again...

[aargmematey]

TDK=everything I wanted it to be and more!

Also (Spoilers for the next few paragraphs), I was pleased that it didn't really have a "Boss Fight" like Iron Man, and The Incredible Hulk. And I didn't see the climax of the movie as "Batman and Joker FIGHT" because honestly, their fight wasn't really all that impressive. I thought that the climax was definitely geared toward the people in the boats, rather than Batman Vs. Joker (if that makes any sense, I'm getting kind of rambley here). Plus I think the Batman Vs. Joker fight also is less of a boss fight because there is still more movie, and more importanat parts after it. It's not like Incredible Hulk, Iron Man, and Hellboy 2, which are pretty much completely over (aside from some random falling action and character bits) right after the Grand Battle.

And the Batman Voice annoyed me back in Begins, but I can see the sense in it ("Hey, anyone ever notice Batman sounds exactly like Bruce Wayne?"). Also it would have been awkward to have them randomly not use it in this one.

Anyways, Heath Ledger Joker pretty much IS the Joker, and he totally steals the show (which is amazing, since everyone is definitely "on" in this movie). Aaron Eckhart is also darn great, as both Gotham's White Knight, and as Two Face (although I wish they would have kept him around longer). Christian Bale was great as both Bruce Wayne (I never get tired of seeing him play up his...playboy lifestyle), and Batman.

All in all I thought it was perfect, and I can't wait to see it again (in IMAX! Wheee!)

[eatmyshorts]

Batman's voice is a really, really lame reason to criticize this movie for...

Just so you know, aargmematey, the IMAX Dark Knight is really freaking amazing. The opening sequence looked so awesome filling up the whole screen and pretty much every outstanding action sequence was filmed using the IMAX cameras. Awesome!

[CheshireKat]

Ok guys, seen it twice at this point and here are my thoughts, disjointed and in no particular order. (SPOILERZ!)

First off, Heath Ledger. Everybody's talking about his performance, so I won't go on about it, but man...damn.

I loved how true to the their comic book counterparts the characters were: Particularly in the characterization of Harvey. The hints at how much rage he keeps bottled up, even before his accident is spot on, and the gruesomeness of his transformation afterwards is the closest I've ever seen to the comic book version. I was reminded of Tommy Lee jones and what a cartoon character he looked like in Forever. This was Two-face as he should be, scarred mentally and physically to the point where it's only logical that he goes off the deep end.

Also you see hints of Batman's unsettling leanings towards fascism with the sonar device. Yeah he destroyed it when he was done, but he crossed a pretty serious line to get the job done. If you've ever read JLA: Tower of Babel, or Infinite Crisis (specifically the whole Brother Eye thing) it's enough to give you pause.

I actually applauded when Tiny Lister threw the detonator out the window. Some people will say it was cheesy, but I was really moved. A tiny ray of hope in the midst of hopelessness and madness. Besides, I'll bet you anything that if anyone had pushed the detonator button they would have blown up themselves and NOT the other ferry. Can you not totally see the Joker doing that?

The only gripes I have are really very minor. First, I'm gonna agree with Oogie and say it wouldn't have hurt Bale's performance to take the Batman Voice down a few notches, and secondly the fight scenes seemed to lacking ever so slightly. Thirdly, why did they have to pin Two-face's crimes specifically on Batman? I mean it's noble and all that, but if you're going to lie anyway, why not just add the names to the Joker's body count? I didn't get it. Ultimately none of these mis-steps hurt the film in my estimation, just little details that bothered me.

[TheOogieBoogieMan]

Jul 18, 2008 20:25:46 GMT -5 aargmematey said:

And the Batman Voice annoyed me back in Begins, but I can see the sense in it ("Hey, anyone ever notice Batman sounds exactly like Bruce Wayne?"). Also it would have been awkward to have them randomly not use it in this one.

It's like Mike said, toning it down a bit would have made a world of difference. Especially towards the end, he starting sounding too much like Nathan Explosion for my taste.

I'm hoping there'll be a scene in the third movie showing Bruce Wayne unable to go about his business for at least one day because he growled himself hoarse as Batman the night before.

[blinkfan]

If, Heath Ledger DOESN'T get the oscar, it's a crime against cinema. I agree, with everything everyone has said about him. He was the Joker. Amazing.
Twoface was incredible, as was everyone else.
But seriously, Heath Ledger= OMG *Fanboy Squeal*

[Lordmoon]

I normally hate going into the movie when an actors performance is being praised as much as Ledger's was for months on end before release, but in this case it's all warranted and more! It’s very sad to know that he’ll never have another chance to try and repeat his amazing performance accomplishment in this film.

Oh and I fully agree on Bale's "Batman voice" being way over the top. It got to the point to where I would nearly cringe each time Batman opened his mouth. Realism (disguising the voice) should have been sacrificed over quality in this case.

And was it just me or did it feel like the character of Batman played more of a side roll rather then the lead of the movie? Both the characters of the Joker and Harvey Dent/Two-Face seemed to drive the entire film. Batman was the least interesting of the bunch with the ending only barely making me remember that this was actually a Batman movie.

[james42]

Well, I'll hold my breath, close my eyes, and attempt a fairly virginal post here--kind of a 'long time fan/first-time caller' kind of thing.

First off, I've never felt like I've truly seen Batman protrayed well on the screen until Batman Begins showed up. That was the Batman I grew up with...the mid-to-late eighties Detective Comics and Miller's Dark Knight and the Killing Joke, et al. I had never really hitched a ride on the Burton bandwagon, though I can say I always respected his vision and thoroughly enjoyed Keaton's portrayal. I just never cared for Burton's 'world' as it applied to Batman.

The Dark Knight, I feel, surpassed Batman Begins with a far more complex plot, action, and pacing. No doubt. And no further reason to throw accolades upon Heath Ledger. His performance is, to my mind, incontestable as the best Joker to be put on screen.

Not three hours from having the closing credits roll across my vision, I'm not yet decided on just how much I liked the film, but there were some disappointments for me.

1) Hear-hear to OogieBoogieman's comment about the overdone endings in so many movies. Besides just becoming tiring and tedious, in the case of The Dark Knight, I was sensing the movie wrapping up and coming to a dramatic close when Dent was first shown in the hospital and talking to Gordon. Yet, it kept going...and going...and going. The themes of anarchy, chaos had already been so firmly established, but we had to see yet another big scene played out with the Joker and his hostages, all while the boat scene was happening (and yes, like mentioned in a previous post, I firmly believe that whichever boat pushed the button, it would have been them and not the other boat to blow up). I would have much preferred an intense psychological dialogue between the Joker and Batman instead of having climax upon climax in that building with the all-powerful deux-ex-machina of wonders manned by Lucius. That said, the Joker's final comments to Batman were still well-written and fully enjoyed--the immovable object and the irresistable force and the allusion to them playing this game to the end of time. Very haunting.

2) Someone mentioned Batman seeming to be more in the periphery of the story this time around, and I absolutely agree. For me, I missed the substance of the Bruce/Batman character/conflict. Batman was much more simply a cowl than a character in this one.

3) Maggie Gyllenhall--I am a HUGE fan of Maggie's, and maybe that's why I was so disappointed by her in this one. I think she, like Katie Holmes before her, was a victim to the writers who have never bothered to flesh out Rachel's character as anything more than a plot device to complicate Bruce's emotions. However (and I'll be unpopular in saying this), I thought that--much to my surprise--Katie Holmes managed to do more with the few flakes of meat stuck to the bone of the role than Maggie did. At least Katie had her scene in the car with Bruce after the trial when Bruce showed her the gun. Maggie played every scene so tame, no fire or emotion other than as the love-interest. She could have at least put more emotion into her final words with Harvey.

4) As much as I loved Ledger's Joker, I think they (or he) was too worried about overdoing the role that he ended up underselling it, and in the case of the Joker, I think we lost just a little of that feel of the Joker. Much as I enjoyed the role, I would have enjoyed it even more with just a few more maniacal laughs and just a little less logic and cohesion to his speeches.

5) As cool and shocking as Two-Face looked, I did feel they went too over-the-top with the severity of his injury. Unless I'm strongly mistaken, the facts seemed too obvious to me that, one, the hospital would have never allowed him to lay there, unbandaged, untreated. Two, he would have never been able to do any of the things he did outside the hospital because he would have collapsed from massive infections within three to four hours from all that exposed skin and bone--not to mention gangrene. And that lidless eyeball would have dried up to nothing as well. Yeah, I know, maybe looking at it a bit too realistically, but isn't that what this latest Batman franchise is trying to sell in the first place??

Just my take on things. And my opinions don't negate all the positives. I really, really liked the movie. I just think it could have been even better than it was if the movie would have taken a few more breaths, embellished the moments and the characters a bit more, and avoided the big fx/action climax(es).

Oh, and though I agree Bale upped the Batman voice a bit much, I do still like it. More than just the reality of disguise, it also helps to truly separate the the characters of Bruce and Batman, who both are, arguably, distinct characters in certain aspects.

[TheLuckyOne]

Wow. I'm going to say something I never, ever thought I'd be able to say: Heath Ledger was as good a Joker as Mark Hamill. And that is DAMN good. I'm only the 15 millionth person to comment on it, but he completely owned the movie.

I actually enjoyed Aaron Eckhart's performance as both Harvey Dent/Two-Face, moreso than most people from what it sounds like. I would have liked it if his voice had changed as Two-Face to be a bit more gravelly, indicating maybe some vocal cord damage, but that's a minor point. I was surprised that Two-Face featured as much as he did, I figured they'd show everything leading up to his transformation and then leave him to be the main villain for number 3. I assume they left whether he lived or died ambiguous in order to give themselves freedom on whether to make him the main focus of the next movie or cut him out entirely. One criticism my wife had is that it felt like his mental shift from Dent to Two-Face seemed sort of out-of-nowhere, which I can see. I told her that the animated series version established that he had a lot of buried anger and the beginnings of a split personality even before his face was scarred; we both agreed that that might have helped in this case, even though we also felt the movie didn't need to be any longer. Maybe replacing the Hong Kong stuff with a session with Harvey's therapist would have been the way to go.

I'll also admit to being extremely surprised that they killed Rachel. Pleasantly so - obviously Batman can never permanently settle down, so his love interests have to either die or leave, and this was definitely more powerful than a love interest just disappearing between movies and never being mentioned again. (See: Vicki Vale, et al.) My wife and I couldn't decide whether the filmmakers left it intentionally vague as to whether Batman meant to rescue Harvey... as in, he went to Harvey's address because he knew, no matter how much he loved Rachel, that Harvey was more important to Gotham as a whole, or the Joker intentionally gave him the wrong addresses.

Okay, so: thoughts on the villain for the next one? I'm pulling for a Two-Face centered movie, but if they go for a new villain, who should it be? I've heard that Goyer said they have no interest in the Penguin or Catwoman (can't confirm it, but that's what I heard), and maybe it's just me, but the Riddler seems a little too goofy for the Goyer/Bale Batman. Maybe if they reinvented him.

-D

[drew]

Jul 21, 2008 10:01:30 GMT -5 TheLuckyOne said:

Okay, so: thoughts on the villain for the next one? I'm pulling for a Two-Face centered movie, but if they go for a new villain, who should it be? I've heard that Goyer said they have no interest in the Penguin or Catwoman (can't confirm it, but that's what I heard), and maybe it's just me, but the Riddler seems a little too goofy for the Goyer/Bale Batman. Maybe if they reinvented him.

The Riddler as is would be way too goofy. And a darker, reinvented Riddler would pretty much be The Joker again.

I'm pretty sure everybody reading this thread has seen the flick at this point but... SPOILERS BE BELOW. Give 'em a highlight.

First, in regard to the above post about Two-Face being the next villain, isn't he dead? Also, now that we've had the big reveal of his face and seen his coin-flip gimmick, the character is pretty much exhausted in my opinion. Also, there was a slight reference that I caught about Batman's new armor not being great against bullets or dogs but being "pretty good for a cat". Clever if intentional, indeed. Assuming they don't come completely out of left field with King Tut or Egghead, or do the unthinkable and recast the Joker, I'm thinking that we may get a Scarecrow reprise (since they went out of their way to let us know he's still alive). Of course there are a ton of villains to choose from if they aren't worried about alienating the casual Batman fans by choosing someone they haven't heard of.[/font]




End spoilers. End post. Chewbacca lives on Endor.

[TheLuckyOne]

Jul 21, 2008 11:01:42 GMT -5 drew said:

I'm pretty sure everybody reading this thread has seen the flick at this point but... SPOILERS BE BELOW. Give 'em a highlight.

First, in regard to the above post about Two-Face being the next villain, isn't he dead? Also, now that we've had the big reveal of his face and seen his coin-flip gimmick, the character is pretty much exhausted in my opinion.

I'm just going to assume that if you're reading this, you've seen the movie, so be forewarned.

In my opinion, they left Harvey's fate intentionally ambiguous. Batman fell from the same height he did and was perfectly fine, and there's no visible wounds on his body. Batman doesn't check for a pulse or anything. He and Gordon talk about the necessity for Harvey Dent to be dead so people won't see how far he fell and lose faith, which is why they hold a funeral for him at the end; but I could 100% believe Gordon and/or Batman smuggling Two-Face away to some undisclosed location. Nothing is guaranteed, of course, but I think that's why they left it ambiguous. It just doesn't make sense to me that they would go to such pains to leave the Joker alive but then kill Two-Face.

As for him being "exhausted," I can't say I agree. If all the villain is to you is a coin flip gimmick, then I suppose I could see that. But Two-Face is so, so much more than that... he's Batman's greatest failing, with a personal connection to Batman that the Joker will never have. The Joker's a great villain, but at the end of the day he's some guy Batman never met before he went crazy. But Batman will always have a blind spot with Two-Face because he remembers the great man Dent was before his accident, and he's always hopeful that Harvey can be rehabilitated (as, indeed, he has been a couple of times, though it never sticks). Writers have gotten great stories out of Dent's duality, such as during a federal emergency, when Two-Face helped rescue workers save trapped people after an earthquake because his coin kept turning up good side up. Or one of my personal favorites, when Two-Face put Jim Gordon on trial for violating their treaty and Gordon called Harvey Dent as his defense attorney, forcing Two-Face to argue a trial against himself.

Mind you, I'm biased- in general I find the personal connection Dent had with Batman and the duality motif more fascinating than the Joker's random chaos (with certain notable exceptions, like Heath Ledger's performance in TDK, natch).

-D