Jump to content

Anyone who didn't like The Dark Knight is a tool.


EHK for Darwin

Recommended Posts

Is it me, or is the next villain Cat Woman?

Batman: "Does this stop attacks from dogs?"
Lucius: "What kind? Rottweiler or chihuahua?"
Batman gives him a look.
Lucius: "Well, it stops cats, too."

Methinks that's a throw-away to Cat Woman.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ouroboros' post='1457828' date='Jul 27 2008, 00.41']How the hell is Bane a non-cheeseball villain?[/quote]

He's physically powerful, as intelligent as Batman, and broke his back. He's pretty non-cheeseball. Unless you've only seen him in Batman Forever, but that's not really Bane.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LogicWarrior' post='1457815' date='Jul 27 2008, 00.16']The hype for this movie was a bit too much. I'd say it's Die Hard-good, not The Godfather-good. Ledger probably did the best comic book villain ever but that's not saying much and it definitely wasn't Oscar-worthy [b]but he'll get it cause he's dead and got a lot of attention for dying.[/b] It was a completely one-dimensional role (although executed perfectly) except for the groan-worthy pseudo-philosophy. Also Bane will be the next villain cause he's the only non-cheeseball villain left. Catwoman and the Riddler? God, no. THIS IS SIRIUZ BATMAN AND MUST HAVE MORAL PONDERING BETWEEN FIGHT SCENES.[/quote]

I wish you'd do some moral pondering before blowing off the dead so easily.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Simon of Steele' post='1457856' date='Jul 27 2008, 00.26']He's physically powerful, as intelligent as Batman, and broke his back. He's pretty non-cheeseball. Unless you've only seen him in Batman Forever, but that's not really Bane.[/quote]

Agreed. The Bane from Knightfall would be a potentially great villain to introduce, although his Knightfall role wouldn't quite work without introducing more villains for him to use as part of his plan.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Two-Face was a better villain. I thought Ledger was pretty good as well, and yeah, that was probably my favourite incarnation of the character (not a fan), but I don't think he was as good as every one made him out to be.

I really liked the movie (seen it twice in the three days it's been out... slightly more than $2 here, though), loved Dent and Gordon, but was confused by the inclusion of Scarecrow right at the start. What was that about? After all the shit that went down in BB, they gave him that crap appearance? Should have just left him out.

Could have done without Maggie Gyllenhaal, but fuck she's better than Katie Holmes. I wanted to slap the cow every time she came on screen. It's the doe eyes and Dawsons-Creek-smile she has to do in every scene. Ack.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

as of now I've seen it three times in 24 hours and i'm debating if there should be a fourth. i am completely sold on the awesomeness of this movie in a way I never was for BB. in fact, i really dislike 80% of that movie. the only part i enjoyed was Scarecrow. Ra's was completely and totally mishandled. he's a superb character and would have made a great kung fu-mentor for Batman if they'd just given him his proper intensity (and swarth) without polite-ing him up by giving the role to Liam Neeson.

but anyway, one question remains: who are the 5 people (2 cops, 3 civilians) Two-Face killed? I count 2 civilians (Maroni and driver) and 1 cop (Wuertz). i think the rest might be from cut scenes. the other cop might be the one in the hospital shot by the joker, since he gave the same gun to harvey afterwards, but i don't see how such data could be retrieved from that crime scene.


as for later movies: they would need something absolutely sublime to continue from this film, not only for its quality but also because of the pissing-on-the-dead emotion which might subconsciously be engendered by following up on Ledger's necro-role. ideas;

1. a rumor that Philip Seymour Hoffman might play the Penguin. I would cream over this, since the Penguin is one of the few villains who, if played by a swank-master like Hoffman, might have the potential of carrying on the mental intensity of TDK.

2. a well-done Bane would cap off a trilogy and allow everyone a clean break from the threat of an otherwise interminable Bat-series. after all, Bane is supposed to be the Omega villain of the Batman universe.

if played in wrestling gear, undoable. if given the Joker treatment, eminently doable with a Nolan script, especially if they emphasize the fact that Bane is the only person on earth with gifts matching Bruce Wayne's, but he gained them by spending his entire life in a vicious prison. (perhaps too wacky if set on the canonical south american island-prison).

as for actors, i've said for years that Vin Diesel already is Bane and just doesn't know it. watch the harder parts of Pitch Black for evidence.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LogicWarrior' post='1457815' date='Jul 27 2008, 02.16']The hype for this movie was a bit too much. I'd say it's Die Hard-good, not The Godfather-good. Ledger probably did the best comic book villain ever but that's not saying much and it definitely wasn't Oscar-worthy but he'll get it cause he's dead and got a lot of attention for dying. It was a completely one-dimensional role (although executed perfectly) except for the groan-worthy pseudo-philosophy. Also Bane will be the next villain cause he's the only non-cheeseball villain left. Catwoman and the Riddler? God, no. THIS IS SIRIUZ BATMAN AND MUST HAVE MORAL PONDERING BETWEEN FIGHT SCENES.[/quote]

Die Hard? Really? Sure, this movie probably laid the blueprints for every generic action movie, but it's still a generic action movie.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='The Stranger' post='1457911' date='Jul 27 2008, 05.30']as for later movies: they would need something absolutely sublime to continue from this film, not only for its quality but also because of the pissing-on-the-dead emotion which might subconsciously be engendered by following up on Ledger's necro-role.[/quote]

I'm thinking [url="http://www.amazon.com/Batman-Venom-Dennis-ONeil/dp/1563891018"]Venom.[/url]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]I'd say it's [b]Die Hard-good[/b], not The Godfather-good.[/quote]

So...top 3 greatest action film of all time quality? Not top 3 greatest films of all time? Ok, I can live with that.

[quote]Ledger probably did the best comic book villain ever but that's not saying much and it definitely wasn't Oscar-worthy but he'll get it cause he's dead and got a lot of attention for dying.[/quote]

Yes, he'll get all that undeserved praise cause he died and we all love a sob story. Has jack shit to do with creating one of iconic villains of any genre. Nothing to do with a performance that kept you utterly captivated, on the edge of your seat just begging for the next Ledger scene. Ledger was brilliant. Death or no death, this absolutely deserves a nod.

Yeah, its not the type of film the Oscar's typically award. He's not a regular critical darling playing a retard. But the Academy has grown some balls in the past on occasions and given well deserved nominations to non-standard Oscar bait. (Depp as Captain Jack Sparrow being the most recent and obvious example) They can and should do it again.

[quote]It was a completely one-dimensional role (although executed perfectly) except for the groan-worthy pseudo-philosophy.[/quote]

This is the second time I've heard this in these threads and I called it bullshit once, but I'd like an explanation. What the hell was so one-dimensional about the role? Would it have been better if he had a sick kid at home to feed? If he felt some guilt or doubt over his actions? (reposting from my earlier to the same complaint) The Joker wasn't simply evil for evil's sake. He was a chaotic force of nature. Brilliant, calculating, yet completely unpredictable. Terrorist. Anarchist. Firmly convinced that the existing social order was an arbitrary fabrication and that he could bring it down with a few precise nudges. I don't understand how it can be so one-dimensional when I have so rarely seen this type of villain portrayed anywhere, and never with this level of skill and precision.

And every time a film tries to elevate itself from its rather meager origins, we get naysayers who toss out lines like 'groan-worthy pseudo-philosophy' or 'philosophy 101' so that they can feekl smarter than the rest of us proles who actually applauded the film's willingness to be something more than it was supposed to be and its competent execution thereof. The film delved into the themes its already been praised for with just enough depth to move well beyond mere lip service, yet avoided overloading it with distracting, yawn-inducing exposition. And they did so with some sharp, well written dialog that was never groan-inducing (though Batman Begins certainly had a few of those groan moments. 'Why do we fall' anyone?).

[quote]Also Bane will be the next villain cause he's the only non-cheeseball villain left. Catwoman and the Riddler? God, no. T[b]HIS IS SIRIUZ BATMAN AND MUST HAVE MORAL PONDERING BETWEEN FIGHT SCENES.[/b][/quote]

What is your problem? That the Dark Knight had the balls to be something more than just another comic book movie? That it elevated the superhero genre towards legitimate critical respectability? That the positive critical reviews no longer read 'well, it was great fun for what it was', but actually get into some legitimate gushing praise usually reserved for 'more important films?'
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm also not sure what problems people had with the Joker. Few villains are done well and I'm not quite sure what was expected. I also don't understand the one-dimensional aspect. In ASOIAF, do we need [i]every single[/i] character to be grey? Is Gregor Clegane's character any less dimensional because he wasn't an abused stepchild? A dimensional character doesn't equate to a sympathetic one if that's what's being argued. If not, I'm curious what could have been done with the Joker to elevate him.

[quote name='GuybrushThreepwood' post='1457831' date='Jul 27 2008, 02.45']Have Barry Bonds play him. It's a real-world allegory.[/quote]

Heh..
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Il Chiarimento' post='1458067' date='Jul 27 2008, 12.27']And every time a film tries to elevate itself from its rather meager origins, we get naysayers who toss out lines like 'groan-worthy pseudo-philosophy' or 'philosophy 101' so that they can feekl smarter than the rest of us proles who actually applauded the film's willingness to be something more than it was supposed to be and its competent execution thereof.[/quote]
EHK, I love you. You saved me the time of trying to write a similar rant.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='TerraPrime' post='1457849' date='Jul 27 2008, 07.10']Is it me, or is the next villain Cat Woman?

Batman: "Does this stop attacks from dogs?"
Lucius: "What kind? Rottweiler or chihuahua?"
Batman gives him a look.
Lucius: "Well, it stops cats, too."

Methinks that's a throw-away to Cat Woman.[/quote]
I already mentioned that. No one else thought the same, though. :( I honestly can't see how she'd work well in a Nolan film anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly I don't care what villain they do or what character they add. Penguin, Catwoman.. shit at this point they can do Superman and I wouldn't care as long as Nolan and Goyer are involved. I was very skeptical about Ledger being the Joker at first but I grew into it as time went on. Watching the movie, he blew me away. I'm firmly convinced that Nolan & Co. know what they're doing. I say give them as much freedom as possible because they've done too good of a job to deny them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did someone already address how Batman was able to bend a rifle barrel with one hand during the Scarecrow scene?

I'm not trying to nitpick but that was one of a few times when I went "huh?" I enjoyed the movie. It was well made and well acted. I was suprised how nearly nihilistic the film is. I really didn't get the sense that things were going to get better in Gotham.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw the movie twice, loved it.

Ledger was nothing short of amazing and I was better able to appreciate his performance the second time around: body language, posture, speech cadance and intonation: incredible! Nobody will ever be able to play the Joker again, for at least another decade or longer. I expect him to get an Oscar nod for this.

I don't think Dent is necessarily dead. He could very well be sent to Arkham and nobody would know. Let's hear it for HIPPA laws!

Regarding the rescue of Dent and Rachel: my impression was that the Joker wanted Rachel dead and Dent rescued. He specifically put Dent in a place that was in closer proximity to the police station, then (obviously) deliberately mixed up who was where, because he knew Batman would go after Rachel. The Joker waited long enough before giving the locations because he wanted any rescue for Rachel to be too late.

Yes, the Joker was chaos incarnate. But it's also untrue to say he doesn't make plans. His continual self-contradictions thoughtout the movie were very interesting: changing the stories of how he got his scars, early in the movie he says "It's all according to plan." Then later, in his conversation with Dent, he describes himself like a dog chasing cars. In the scene with the mobsters he says (rather emphatically) that he is not crazy, but later on describes himself as being "made crazy" by the Batman.

It made me wonder exactly how tight the Joker's grip on sanity was: at different times in the contradictions, did he himself actually believe what he was saying at the time? Or was it all intentional misdirection? I'll be pondering this one for awhile.

I had two problems with the movie, however.

1. In the penthouse party scene, Batman jumps out the window after Rachel, leaving Joker with all of Bruce Wayne's party guests. Somehow, I just don't think the Joker would have simply left out the front door, without some twisted "social experiment".

2. This movie should have been "R" and I don't like the fact that there are kids toys being marketed for this movie. As other posters have mentioned, there were a lot of frightened kids in the movies wearing "Batman" T-shirts. Heck, even my teenager and HIS teenage friends said it should have been "R".

Overall, the best movie of its genre I've ever seen and overall an excellent film. One of the best movies I've seen in a long time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Harlot' post='1458258' date='Jul 27 2008, 15.17']Did someone already address how Batman was able to bend a rifle barrel with one hand during the Scarecrow scene?

I'm not trying to nitpick but that was one of a few times when I went "huh?" I enjoyed the movie. It was well made and well acted. I was suprised how nearly nihilistic the film is. I really didn't get the sense that things were going to get better in Gotham.[/quote]

There's some sort of thing in his hand. He uses it latter to shred a hole in the side of the van. At least, that's what I've been told.

[quote]2. This movie should have been "R" and I don't like the fact that there are kids toys being marketed for this movie. As other posters have mentioned, there were a lot of frightened kids in the movies wearing "Batman" T-shirts. Heck, even my teenager and HIS teenage friends said it should have been "R".[/quote]

Yeah, this movie better then any other exposes the stupidity and hypocrisy of the movie ratings system. This was not a fucking kids movie. Not even close.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='WarGalley' post='1458238' date='Jul 27 2008, 13.04']Honestly I don't care what villain they do or what character they add. Penguin, Catwoman.. shit at this point they can do Superman and I wouldn't care as long as Nolan and Goyer are involved. I was very skeptical about Ledger being the Joker at first but I grew into it as time went on. Watching the movie, he blew me away. I'm firmly convinced that Nolan & Co. know what they're doing. I say give them as much freedom as possible because they've done too good of a job to deny them.[/quote]
:agree:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saw it, amazing stuff. Heath Ledger went beyond all expectations and then some. His Joker will never be surpassed, end of story. Gordon and Dent were quite impressive as well.

Couple of oddities, Dent's injury was way over the top (but then I don't know what it all was like in the comics) and a bit of an action overload in the 2nd half of the movie putting the plot line on the backseat at times, other than that, I'll probably go see it again.

Did the coin make anyone think of NCFOM by the Coens?

eta: I agree on the age category. Probably would have been upped if Rachel had shown a bit more cleavage. :rolleyes:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...