The Dark Knight (Possible spoilers)

[cardero]

I would enjoy seeing a Clayface or a manbat, give it more of an edge in horror.

 

[McBell]

I don't mean it as an insult. I knw that not everyone has read or has been a fan of comics. I would just expect someone who has been a fan of the comic to have a certain expectation of Bruce Wayne. I realized that someone who isn't a fan would obviously not have that same expectation. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with having a different expectation. I was wondering whether your opinion was in spite of that expectation (which would be high praise for Keaton), or whether it was due to a lack of expectation.

I'm sorry if that sounds insulting. I don't mean it to.

I am not insulted.
I have been told by several people that my not having read the comics gives me an advantage with the films because I do not have any expectations.

 

[Magic Man]

I am not insulted.
I have been told by several people that my not having read the comics gives me an advantage with the films because I do not have any expectations.

I would agree. It's the same thing I try to do with all movies, go in with no expectations, although I'm usually not successful. I would say, in some cases, though, that expectations can enhance the experience. I would say that I loved Spider-Man so much because of my expectations, and it living up to them. I can say the same for this movie too. Unfortunately, more often than not, I am let down rather than enhanced, though.

 

[McBell]

I would agree. It's the same thing I try to do with all movies, go in with no expectations, although I'm usually not successful. I would say, in some cases, though, that expectations can enhance the experience. I would say that I loved Spider-Man so much because of my expectations, and it living up to them. I can say the same for this movie too. Unfortunately, more often than not, I am let down rather than enhanced, though.

I know what you mean.
The Lord of the Rings movies made the books even better, IMHO, because they removed much of the extra info from the books without destroying the storyline.
The Harry Potter movies on the other hand....

 

[Magic Man]

I know what you mean.
The Lord of the Rings movies made the books even better, IMHO, because they removed much of the extra info from the books without destroying the storyline.
The Harry Potter movies on the other hand....

Yeah, I always have the dilemma of whether or not to read a book before the movie comes out. I still haven't read LoTR, but I plan to someday. I also plan to read Harry Potter, and see the movies at some point. I generally try to read the books before I see the movies, just because the books tend to be better, even thought they are not always. For instance, I haven't seen The Golden Compass yet, because I haven't finished the book.

 

[McBell]

For instance, I haven't seen The Golden Compass yet, because I haven't finished the book.

I sincerely hope that the books are better than the movie.
IMHO, the movie royally sucks.

 

[cardero]

Originally Posted by Mestemia
I am not insulted.
I have been told by several people that my not having read the comics gives me an advantage with the films because I do not have any expectations.

I would agree. It's the same thing I try to do with all movies, go in with no expectations, although I'm usually not successful. I would say, in some cases, though, that expectations can enhance the experience. I would say that I loved Spider-Man so much because of my expectations, and it living up to them. I can say the same for this movie too. Unfortunately, more often than not, I am let down rather than enhanced, though.

I would be interesting in knowing how much these superhero films have affected people to pursue the comic medium.
As a comic fan, I already know how difficult it is to please the established fan base but are these movies actually inspiring audiences to actively seek the books and discover the myths of these characters?

 

[McBell]

I would be interesting in knowing how much these superhero films have affected people to pursue the comic medium.
As a comic fan, I already know how difficult it is to please the established fan base but are these movies actually inspiring audiences to actively seek the books and discover the myths of these characters?

Not me.
I do not care for the way comics are formatted.

 

[cardero]

I'm glad I wasn't the only one who thought about this.

http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/news/ap/20080803/121779624000.html

 

[d3vaLL]

I'm going to straight up admit that the movie came off mediocre to me. Heath Ledger was great of course, but whoopty-doo. Batman Begins blew this away.

Why?

1. Children's cartoon dialogue from pretty much any extra in the movie. The opening scene made me think I was watching something made by Power Ranger's writers (besides them killing people).
2. The hand-to-hand combat was just really lame. Batman drops in and starts punching people. There is nothing stealthy, special, or exciting about it. And I am not fooled with quick-cut camera action and close-up fist shots. I was really surprised by this.
3. Christian Bale was near a C actor for me in this. For Bruce Wayne he just lifts his eyebrows and says something rich and smug like "I own the place." Eh? Secondly, when a certain character dies, Batman's actions didn't really seem effected, ESPECIALLY towards The Joker...there was no emotional discussion with this at all. I was surprised by this.
4. Batman's voice was very, VERY stupid. Does he have an echo machine next to his mouth or something? Talk about taking someone out of the movie. Batman Begins had it right, sound deep and mean and you're good Batman...no need for nonsensical FX.

5. An intimate relationship with Harvey Dent and Rachel Dawes magically appears in this movie. Oh, 2 years later? I'm suppose to just infer that. Bad writing. I know it's easy to hate on Katie Holmes, but at least she expressed some attachment to Bruce Wayne's character. Didn't get this at all.

6. Harvey Dent's whole story. He isn't Batman's friend or what not, now this is a rewriting I understand that, but it takes out Batman's empathy for the guy. This guy goes from responsible and good natured to a murdering rampager? I know the coin is burnt on one side man, but that doesn't mean you just start killing everyone you think is responsible for that certain death. ESPECIALLY ignoring the Joker when he's right in front of you. Oh he's not just an agent of Chaos and it's nothing personal with him? Harvey gets that? But that doesn't go for anyone else involved in that death? Stupid. Almost as stupid as the CG on his face.

Finally, the movie just felt completely convoluted and random. I had trouble taking things seriously and seeing how it all connects while having to infer those things magically like the scope of Joker's network or power when he burns all the money he uses to attain it. I would think killing Batman would end a lot of his struggle with corrupting the people of Gotham. But suddenly, he doesn't want to. Doesn't add up to me.

I was so excited for this movie too, am I alone here?

 

[cardero]

I'm going to straight up admit that the movie came off mediocre to me. Heath Ledger was great of course, but whoopty-doo. Batman Begins blew this away.

Why?

1. Children's cartoon dialogue from pretty much any extra in the movie. The opening scene made me think I was watching something made by Power Ranger's writers (besides them killing people).
2. The hand-to-hand combat was just really lame. Batman drops in and starts punching people. There is nothing stealthy, special, or exciting about it. And I am not fooled with quick-cut camera action and close-up fist shots. I was really surprised by this.
3. Christian Bale was near a C actor for me in this. For Bruce Wayne he just lifts his eyebrows and says something rich and smug like "I own the place." Eh? Secondly, when a certain character dies, Batman's actions didn't really seem effected, ESPECIALLY towards The Joker...there was no emotional discussion with this at all. I was surprised by this.
4. Batman's voice was very, VERY stupid. Does he have an echo machine next to his mouth or something? Talk about taking someone out of the movie. Batman Begins had it right, sound deep and mean and you're good Batman...no need for nonsensical FX.

5. An intimate relationship with Harvey Dent and Rachel Dawes magically appears in this movie. Oh, 2 years later? I'm suppose to just infer that. Bad writing. I know it's easy to hate on Katie Holmes, but at least she expressed some attachment to Bruce Wayne's character. Didn't get this at all.

6. Harvey Dent's whole story. He isn't Batman's friend or what not, now this is a rewriting I understand that, but it takes out Batman's empathy for the guy. This guy goes from responsible and good natured to a murdering rampager? I know the coin is burnt on one side man, but that doesn't mean you just start killing everyone you think is responsible for that certain death. ESPECIALLY ignoring the Joker when he's right in front of you. Oh he's not just an agent of Chaos and it's nothing personal with him? Harvey gets that? But that doesn't go for anyone else involved in that death? Stupid. Almost as stupid as the CG on his face.

Finally, the movie just felt completely convoluted and random. I had trouble taking things seriously and seeing how it all connects while having to infer those things magically like the scope of Joker's network or power when he burns all the money he uses to attain it. I would think killing Batman would end a lot of his struggle with corrupting the people of Gotham. But suddenly, he doesn't want to. Doesn't add up to me.

I was so excited for this movie too, am I alone here?

I agree with everything. Harvey Dent storyline obtrusive and everyone kept tripping over it. Should have saved it for the third installment.

Storyline interchangeable. Could have been any action or non superhero movie. I wouldn't have missed any characters in a Bat-suit or painted clown face. Aspects of Batman, completely under-whelmed.

2 and half hour infomercial for merchandising Bat-Pods.

Was this movie for kids or was it for adults? Should it have been rated R or PG-13? When you have decided on a rating, let me know.

And talk about leaving us hanging. What happened at the party that the Joker busted up? He throws Rachel out the window, Batman jumps out to save her, they land on a car, share affectionate looks towards each other-cut to the next scene?!?! What happened at the party? Did everyone leave? Did anyone call the cops? Did anyone get killed? Did they have enough bacon-wrapped shrimp for the Joker? Did they hire the DJ to play for an extra hour? Did the projectionist mix up the film reels?

 

[Mister_T]

Let the rumors begin!

The Riddler (Jonny Depp?) and The Penguin (Phillip Seymour Hoffman?) as possible Batman 3 Villians? IGN: More Batman Villain Buzz

Jolie As Catwoman? IGN: Jolie Linked to Catwoman Role

I don't think any of these guys will top Ledger's performance, but it should awesome anyways.

 

[Magic Man]

I'm going to straight up admit that the movie came off mediocre to me. Heath Ledger was great of course, but whoopty-doo. Batman Begins blew this away.

Why?

1. Children's cartoon dialogue from pretty much any extra in the movie. The opening scene made me think I was watching something made by Power Ranger's writers (besides them killing people).
2. The hand-to-hand combat was just really lame. Batman drops in and starts punching people. There is nothing stealthy, special, or exciting about it. And I am not fooled with quick-cut camera action and close-up fist shots. I was really surprised by this.
3. Christian Bale was near a C actor for me in this. For Bruce Wayne he just lifts his eyebrows and says something rich and smug like "I own the place." Eh? Secondly, when a certain character dies, Batman's actions didn't really seem effected, ESPECIALLY towards The Joker...there was no emotional discussion with this at all. I was surprised by this.
4. Batman's voice was very, VERY stupid. Does he have an echo machine next to his mouth or something? Talk about taking someone out of the movie. Batman Begins had it right, sound deep and mean and you're good Batman...no need for nonsensical FX.

5. An intimate relationship with Harvey Dent and Rachel Dawes magically appears in this movie. Oh, 2 years later? I'm suppose to just infer that. Bad writing. I know it's easy to hate on Katie Holmes, but at least she expressed some attachment to Bruce Wayne's character. Didn't get this at all.

6. Harvey Dent's whole story. He isn't Batman's friend or what not, now this is a rewriting I understand that, but it takes out Batman's empathy for the guy. This guy goes from responsible and good natured to a murdering rampager? I know the coin is burnt on one side man, but that doesn't mean you just start killing everyone you think is responsible for that certain death. ESPECIALLY ignoring the Joker when he's right in front of you. Oh he's not just an agent of Chaos and it's nothing personal with him? Harvey gets that? But that doesn't go for anyone else involved in that death? Stupid. Almost as stupid as the CG on his face.

Finally, the movie just felt completely convoluted and random. I had trouble taking things seriously and seeing how it all connects while having to infer those things magically like the scope of Joker's network or power when he burns all the money he uses to attain it. I would think killing Batman would end a lot of his struggle with corrupting the people of Gotham. But suddenly, he doesn't want to. Doesn't add up to me.

I was so excited for this movie too, am I alone here?

I agree with some points. I agree about the hand-to-hand combat and maybe his Batman voice was a little much. I disagree on most, though. I don't see the problem with the dialogue. I' not really sure what your problem with the Harvey Dent/Rachel Dawes relationship is. It's a while later, and they now have a relationship. They don't have to start from the exact moment Batman Begins left off. You are just supposed to infer that they have a relationship because that's the way it is in the movie. I really don't understand the problem there.

Christian Bale was still good in the role, but he wasn't carrying the movie like he did the first time. He did just what he had to, IMO.

Harvey Dent was very well done. His character was very well fleshed-out, and I think he played a very important role in shaping Batman. Batman began in the first one, but he became the real Batman in this one. He was still not fully formed yet, and Harvey Dent made him become more of the real Batman we all know and love.

As to the convoluted part, I can see that to a degree, but I disagree with the exact examples you give. I don't see the problem with inferring the scope of Joker's network and power. It rises gradually. In the beginning, he is small-time, a nobody. By the end, he's the Joker. I think part of it is that this movie doesn't just spell everything out for you, like a normal superhero movie. It leaves a lot up to you. For instance, is Harvey Dent dead? We don't know.

Also, most of the time in the comics, it is silly when a villain doesn't take a perfect opportunity to kill the hero. In the movie, it made sense, though. It wasn't about killing the Bat, to him, and it wasn't about accomplishing some great result like owning the city. All it was about is creating chaos and corruption. He accomplished that.

You're obviously not alone, as Patrick agrees with you, and I'm sure a lot of others do, too. I happen to disagree, though. I am planning to see it again either this week or next. Maybe my opinion will change, but everyone I know who has seen it more than once only liked it more after the second viewing. I'll be sure to post again after I do.

 

[Magic Man]

Let the rumors begin!

The Riddler (Jonny Depp?) and The Penguin (Phillip Seymour Hoffman?) as possible Batman 3 Villians? IGN: More Batman Villain Buzz

Jolie As Catwoman? IGN: Jolie Linked to Catwoman Role

I don't think any of these guys will top Ledger's performance, but it should awesome anyways.

I have to say, the first two have me really excited. It's hard to imagine anything living up to this one, but those two as those villains give me hope at least for a decent follow-up. I think they could both pull it off in a way that fits the new, gritty, dark, realistic tone of these films.

 

[Harmony]

Let the rumors begin!

The Riddler (Jonny Depp?) and The Penguin (Phillip Seymour Hoffman?) as possible Batman 3 Villians? IGN: More Batman Villain Buzz

Jolie As Catwoman? IGN: Jolie Linked to Catwoman Role

I don't think any of these guys will top Ledger's performance, but it should awesome anyways.

What about Jim Carrey as the Riddler? I think Hoffman will make an ok Penguin. Not sure yet. Jolie mmmeeeoooowwwww as cat woman beats Michelle Pfeiffer.

 

[Kcnorwood]

I think some people are being a bit to harsh on the movie again it's a movie.
Yes, Bale's voice as Batman was a bit too much. The story picked up some two years later & like someone said before we have to assume that Waynes love intrest has moved on & so as he at least to a point. Were things supposed to stay the same some two years down the road? People move in even in the sequals.

mball1297, You complained about things that Wayne said but you forget that he's supposed to be rich & not too bright. You also said that Batman seen detatched when someone dided, that would make sence as Batman he can't let his emotions rule over him. If he did he would be no better then the villians.

As far as the Joker goes he said himself that he didn't want to kill Batman because he needed him. it seemed that you missed that part some how. Remember what Alfred said? Some people just like to see the world burn. The Joker wanted chaos but he wanted to push Batman to do the ONE thing he wouldn't kill. The Joker wasn't supposed to make any sence hence why he was insane & his logic was not yours or mine.


Jim Cary has the Ridder?????? NEVER AGAIN he screwed it up the first time! :no::no::no:

 

[Magic Man]

I think some people are being a bit to harsh on the movie again it's a movie.
Yes, Bale's voice as Batman was a bit too much. The story picked up some two years later & like someone said before we have to assume that Waynes love intrest has moved on & so as he at least to a point. Were things supposed to stay the same some two years down the road? People move in even in the sequals.

mball1297, You complained about things that Wayne said but you forget that he's supposed to be rich & not too bright. You also said that Batman seen detatched when someone dided, that would make sence as Batman he can't let his emotions rule over him. If he did he would be no better then the villians.

As far as the Joker goes he said himself that he didn't want to kill Batman because he needed him. it seemed that you missed that part some how. Remember what Alfred said? Some people just like to see the world burn. The Joker wanted chaos but he wanted to push Batman to do the ONE thing he wouldn't kill. The Joker wasn't supposed to make any sence hence why he was insane & his logic was not yours or mine.


Jim Cary has the Ridder?????? NEVER AGAIN he screwed it up the first time! :no::no::no:

I think there was a mistake. It was not I saying those things. It was d3vall. I quoted him and was opposing him on some of them. I agree with your points, except that Bruce Wayne should not be "not that bright". I don't think Bale played him that way, and that's not how the character is. He is a playboy, and that's how Bale plays him, though.

Also, I don't think it was Jim Carrey who screwed up the Riddler. I think it was that whole movie that screwed up. I think Jim Carrey makes a great Riddler, if you're going for that kind of campy, light Batman. If you're going for the dark, gritty one like they are now, he would definitely not fit.

 

[Kcnorwood]

I think there was a mistake. It was not I saying those things. It was d3vall. I quoted him and was opposing him on some of them. I agree with your points, except that Bruce Wayne should not be "not that bright". I don't think Bale played him that way, and that's not how the character is. He is a playboy, and that's how Bale plays him, though.

Also, I don't think it was Jim Carrey who screwed up the Riddler. I think it was that whole movie that screwed up. I think Jim Carrey makes a great Riddler, if you're going for that kind of campy, light Batman. If you're going for the dark, gritty one like they are now, he would definitely not fit.

Sorry I guess I read that wrong..:sorry1: I will agree with you on the other Batman movie it was truly bad, but I there were other choices then Jim Carry for Riddler.
Let me re-state what I was meaning to say. In the public eye Wayne is your typical playboy & in most peoples view he's nothing special, just another rich spolied brat.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

Heath Ledger was great. A really evil and twisted Joker, unlike the old ones.

An Oscar? I am not too sure, if he did get it, it would b e deserved, but still...

 

[Don Penguinoini]

The Penguin (Phillip Seymour Hoffman?)

Ahem... I have been offered the role... And i have already accepted. Sorry PSH!!!