Jump to content

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


EHK for Darwin

Recommended Posts

[quote name='Shryke' post='1465308' date='Aug 1 2008, 11.07']I don't think so. That's really the main reason I find the idea that he's not dead so weird. One of the big points of this series is that Batman refuses to kill. He can't bring himself to kill the Joker, and the Joker calls him on it, multiple times. And this ties straight back to Dent, who he kills by accident/because he had no other choice. Not killing him cheapens this whole point.[/quote]
So in your mind the Joker won and got Batman to break his one rule. I think that it is a reasonable interpretation. Just as the one I posted before is reasonable, both fit thematically with the movie.

[quote]I was responding to Paddy saying:"The movie does not establish that Dent is dead."

They establish his death. Just like they establish Gordon's. And then latter they establish that Gordon's not dead.

The people of Gotham certainly think he's dead. The only way he's NOT dead is if Gordan and Batman are forming a conspiracy to hide him away somewhere. Which would be extremely difficult considering the cops were on the scene pretty soon afterwards.[/quote]

Yes, just like Gordon pretending to be dead with a bunch of cops, paramedics, and people around him. Impossible in fact.

The movie established that you can fake someone's death with cops around
That people falling from heights do survive (See Rachel, Batman, Joker, and Mob Boss. He looked fairly healthy in his car).

Shryke, if they wanted him to be definatively dead there are plenty of ways movies go about that to show no ambiguity. Motionless bodies in action movies are typically not one of them, I could see how people can reasonably see him as surviving and making that fit thematically in the movie.

I am glad that you enjoyed the movie and felt enriched by your experience, but I just see you stating the same points over and over again without an attempt to acknowledge another perspective. Heck, you are making me just want to say that Dent lives to tweak your nose.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Shryke' post='1465308' date='Aug 1 2008, 17.07']I was responding to Paddy saying:"The movie does not establish that Dent is dead."

They establish his death. Just like they establish Gordon's. And then latter they establish that Gordon's not dead.

The people of Gotham certainly think he's dead. The only way he's NOT dead is if Gordan and Batman are forming a conspiracy to hide him away somewhere. Which would be extremely difficult considering the cops were on the scene pretty soon afterwards.[/quote]
Can you respond to my theory of what would have happened different if Dent had survived? (I put it that way because of your certaintly that he didn't.)
Would Gordon and Batman have killed him?
Would they have just gone "oh well, the Joker won. Now the people of Gotham will know that even the best of them can turn into evil and the city is lost"? I'd find that hard to believe given how much emphasis Batman makes that no one can ever know about Dent.
So what would they have done?

This is pretty important to your belief that the memorial establishes he's dead.

[quote name='Shryke' post='1465308' date='Aug 1 2008, 17.07']You can apply that to any character in the series who we didn't see die in a way that couldn't be survived. So DuCard and Rachel, just to name major ones.[/quote]
Yeah, and I responded. DuCard could be alive. His death is not conclusive. He could come back.
Rachel's is more conclusive, unless you want to think that the Joker would shy away from having her killed?
Gordon smuggling Two-Face into Arkham (or somewhere) is MUCH more reasonable than that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Paddy' post='1465330' date='Aug 1 2008, 12.23']Yeah, and I responded. DuCard could be alive. His death is not conclusive. He could come back.
Rachel's is more conclusive, unless you want to think that the Joker would shy away from having her killed?
Gordon smuggling Two-Face into Arkham (or somewhere) is MUCH more reasonable than that.[/quote]

Yeah, so Dent's as dead as DuCard or Rachel.

[quote]Yes, just like Gordon pretending to be dead with a bunch of cops, paramedics, and people around him. Impossible in fact.[/quote]

Except Gordon's "death" was set up before hand. They were prepared for it.

[quote]So in your mind the Joker won and got Batman to break his one rule.[/quote]

Yes. Nolan talks specifically about this in the interview.

Although it's sort of an accident.

[quote]Shryke, if they wanted him to be definatively dead there are plenty of ways movies go about that to show no ambiguity. Motionless bodies in action movies are typically not one of them, I could see how people can reasonably see him as surviving and making that fit thematically in the movie.[/quote]

It happened literally like a minute before the ending. They wanted to go out strong on the theme of Batman (the Dark Knight)'s sacrifice. Not much time to establish his death beyond the lifeless body and the funeral.

[quote]Can you respond to my theory of what would have happened different if Dent had survived? (I put it that way because of your certaintly that he didn't.)
Would Gordon and Batman have killed him?
Would they have just gone "oh well, the Joker won. Now the people of Gotham will know that even the best of them can turn into evil and the city is lost"? I'd find that hard to believe given how much emphasis Batman makes that no one can ever know about Dent.
So what would they have done?

This is pretty important to your belief that the memorial establishes he's dead.[/quote]

No, it's not. The memorial, as I said, is merely the movie saying "Everyone in Gotham thinks he's dead". That just means he's either dead, or Gordon has faked it. They establish Dent's death. He's only not dead if they then further establish a conspiracy to keep his not-death a secret.

Dent's death is important beacuse:

1) It reinforces the whole "Batman won't take a life" & "Bad shit is bound to happen doing stuff like this" themes. It also creates a beautiful little turn around in that he saves Joker and kills Dent.

2) it establishes the Joker's win over Batman. He turned Dent. But Batman can turn that back on the Joker. He can win, although at a price. He can sacrifice himself to save Gotham, even if they hate him for it. He's the Dark Knight.

[quote]I am glad that you enjoyed the movie and felt enriched by your experience, but I just see you stating the same points over and over again without an attempt to acknowledge another perspective. Heck, you are making me just want to say that Dent lives to tweak your nose.[/quote]

I have acknowledged your perspective. I told you at the top of the page, I find your arguments insubstantial.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Shryke' post='1465334' date='Aug 1 2008, 11.25']Except Gordon's "death" was set up before hand. They were prepared for it.[/quote]
How do we know this?

[quote]Yes. Nolan talks specifically about this in the interview.

Although it's sort of an accident.[/quote]
Debatable point. The only way I have seen you support it is by bolding and saying "see look." Other people have posited logic inferences of those statements that hold truth. Until you can go through and break down the semantics to demonstrate specific reference to your point, it just isn't obvious.

[quote]It happened literally like a minute before the ending. They wanted to go out strong on the theme of Batman (the Dark Knight)'s sacrifice. Not much time to establish his death beyond the lifeless body and the funeral.[/quote]
Couple of examples:

Big spikey thing through him, blood coming out of an orifice, falling from a sky scraper, body twisted to crap, split in half, a piece of rock fell off the building and crushed his head, etc., etc. Much poorer movies have been able to do this, I am sure Nolan and Co could squeeze in a couple of seconds to put the "final nail on the confin" so to speak; the aforementioned stuff would have added little film time. I posit that they didn't do this because Nolan wanted people to make inferences. He wanted people to be ambiguous about it. How you interpret the movie says alot about how you regard society and your role in it, something the movie was very much about.

[quote]I have acknowledged your perspective. I told you at the top of the page, I find your arguments insubstantial.[/quote]

All you have done is call people stupid, which is beneath the intelligent and thoughtful fellow I think you are.

ETA: My quote of your post was pre-edit. Sorry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]How do we know this?[/quote]

Because he wasn't shot? Because after they catch Joker, him and Dent acknowledge it was part of a plan to catch the Joker, but they didn't want to risk Gordon's family, so they faked his death?


[quote]All you have done is call people stupid, which is beneath the intelligent and thoughtful fellow I think you are.[/quote]

Where have I done this?

I don't agree with your point of view. We argue about it. That's the point, no?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Shryke' post='1465365' date='Aug 1 2008, 11.42']Because he wasn't shot? Because after they catch Joker, him and Dent acknowledge it was part of a plan to catch the Joker, but they didn't want to risk Gordon's family, so they faked his death?[/quote]
We don't know if this plan was thought of before Gordon getting shot, or after Gordon was shot they took advantage of a situation. (Both of these scenarios are likely.)

[quote]I don't agree with your point of view. We argue about it. That's the point, no?[/quote]
Just a simple unwillingness to explore why people see it a different way. It strikes me as willfully blind. Paddy asked you a substantial question and you ignored it, by basically stating that it didn't matter because he was dead.

I guess when I encounter a view point radically different than mine own, I want to know why and explore it. You still haven't told me why you think alot of people (on the internet) think that he lives. The only thing I know is that you think he is dead and there is no room for any other interpretation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Debatable point. The only way I have seen you support it is by bolding and saying "see look." Other people have posited logic inferences of those statements that hold truth. Until you can go through and break down the semantics to demonstrate specific reference to your point, it just isn't obvious.[/quote]

[quote][b]He's attempting to fight the most hostile criminals without taking life. This is close to a fool's errand but it's why we love him.[/b] It's one of the reasons his character is so enduring because of this kind of insane choice he's made, to be so good at what he does that he can save everyone.[/quote]

He wants to save everyone, but this is close to a "fool's errand". It's something that almost certainly can't be done.

[quote]And to me, and everyone has a different take on how to do this,[b] but the best way
to explore that idea is to challenge it.[/b] It's too easy to say 'I don't kill people.' We have to see that in action.[/quote]

We want to put Batman in a situation where this choice becomes difficult for him. Where it's not easy and clear cut and simple.

[quote]And to me the paradox is he can't kill the Joker and he isn't trying to kill Harvey Dent, but of course if you're out here doing this, kind of what Alfred says to him in code, [b]if you want to be out here doing this invariably something is going to go wrong.[/b][/quote]

He can't kill the Joker and he doesn't want to kill Dent (notice he uses "doesn't want".) BUT something always goes wrong when your "out here doing this".

So [i]what went wrong[/i]?

[quote][b]And the paradox at the end, the biting part[/b] is that [b]he has to save the Joker [/b]because he has a chance to, and [b]Harvey Dent pays the price[/b] because he's going to kill an innocent. And it's a conundrum.[/quote]

There's a paradox and something went wrong. How do these 2 ideas connect?

What went wrong? Dent "paid the price". What price? He died. How do we know this? Because that's what this whole thing has been about. Batman doesn't want to kill, but something goes wrong.

And to reinforce this, he also talks about a paradox. what paradox? He saves the Joker. He can't save Dent.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Guy Kilmore' post='1465377' date='Aug 1 2008, 12.50']We don't know if this plan was thought of before Gordon getting shot, or after Gordon was shot they took advantage of a situation. (Both of these scenarios are likely.)[/quote]

Except Gordon wasn't shot.

[quote]Just a simple unwillingness to explore why people see it a different way. It strikes me as willfully blind. Paddy asked you a substantial question and you ignored it, by basically stating that it didn't matter because he was dead.

I guess when I encounter a view point radically different than mine own, I want to know why and explore it. You still haven't told me why you think alot of people (on the internet) think that he lives. The only thing I know is that you think he is dead and there is no room for any other interpretation.[/quote]

I have explored the idea. I told you, I found it flawed and insubstantial.

And I did answer Paddy's question. If he didn't die, everything plays out the same no? Except they have to someone very quickly fake Dent's death, and then move him out of their without anyone knowing. And then find somewhere to put him. All on an instants notice.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I think that Dent is dead, it definitely is possible that because Ledger died, WB forced Nolan to make Dent's death more ambiguous (ie, no "he's dead" line) to open up his use in a sequel, since there will be no Joker.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it would seriously cheapen the ending of TDK though. And frankly, I don't think Two-Face, as they made him, could support a whole other movie on his own.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Shryke' post='1465380' date='Aug 1 2008, 11.54']Except Gordon wasn't shot.[/quote]
I could have sworn that he was, taking the bullet meant to hit the mayor. I plan on rewatching it with a friend next week, I will have to look for it

[quote]I have explored the idea. I told you, I found it flawed and insubstantial.

And I did answer Paddy's question. If he didn't die, everything plays out the same no? Except they have to someone very quickly fake Dent's death, and then move him out of their without anyone knowing. And then find somewhere to put him. All on an instants notice.[/quote]
Not like getting Gordon out of an ambulance without anyone noticing is impossible. I am sorry, I don't see that as monumentally difficult. And again, if Nolan was trying to show Dent as dead, there are quick visual things he could do, that are usually done, to do so. He choose not to.

Well, I will take it at your word, your exploration really didn't come through for me in a written format.

[quote]There's a paradox and something went wrong. How do these 2 ideas connect?

What went wrong? Dent "paid the price". What price? He died. How do we know this? Because that's what this whole thing has been about. Batman doesn't want to kill, but something goes wrong.

And to reinforce this, he also talks about a paradox. what paradox? He saves the Joker. He can't save Dent.[/quote]
I don't really have alot of time (trying to finish up the boring stuff at work, so I can go on my week of vacation), so as succient as possible

Paradox. The white knight vs. the dark knight. The white knight was supposed to be unsullied, the dark knight was supposed to be one to do the nefarious deeds. It ends with the white knight as fallen, killing people and being the very thing he fought against. When Dent loses one he loves he turns to "evil", when Batman lost one he love he turned towards "good." The paradox is the one who was meant to be the public hero is no longer able to be so, where as the one who hid in the shadows is now trying to be the champion of justice under the guise of a murderer.

He can no longer save Dent, Dent crossed that line and is lost. Dent paid a huge price, just not neccessarily his life, but everything that is important. Batman holds to some set of ideals and struggles to do so.

(I find this discussion amusing, because I believe that Dent died. Even though with Dent's death the Joker still lost. Batman still is who he is, even though that action crossed the line. There is more to our moral fiber than a set of rules.)

This is all I got time for, so back to lurking and working!

ETA:

Brahm,
[quote]Although I think that Dent is dead, it definitely is possible that because Ledger died, WB forced Nolan to make Dent's death more ambiguous (ie, no "he's dead" line) to open up his use in a sequel, since there will be no Joker.[/quote]

That is my thought on the matter as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Guy Kilmore' post='1465429' date='Aug 1 2008, 13.13']I could have sworn that he was, taking the bullet meant to hit the mayor. I plan on rewatching it with a friend next week, I will have to look for it[/quote]

At the time it looks like he's shot, but he has no injuries alter from what I remember. If he'd ACTUALLY been shot, I think he'd still be injured when he comes back like a few days later. I may be wrong on this one though, as I might have missed him being injured.

[quote]Not like getting Gordon out of an ambulance without anyone noticing is impossible. I am sorry, I don't see that as monumentally difficult. And again, if Nolan was trying to show Dent as dead, there are quick visual things he could do, that are usually done, to do so. He choose not to.

Well, I will take it at your word, your exploration really didn't come through for me in a written format.[/quote]

As I said, the key here is that Gordon's "death" was a setup up. They had time to prepare. Time to set up a fake ambulance to come get him.

They don't have that kind of time to prepare with Dent.

[quote]Paradox. The white knight vs. the dark knight. The white knight was supposed to be unsullied, the dark knight was supposed to be one to do the nefarious deeds. It ends with the white knight as fallen, killing people and being the very thing he fought against. When Dent loses one he loves he turns to "evil", when Batman lost one he love he turned towards "good." The paradox is the one who was meant to be the public hero is no longer able to be so, where as the one who hid in the shadows is now trying to be the champion of justice under the guise of a murderer.

He can no longer save Dent, Dent crossed that line and is lost. Dent paid a huge price, just not neccessarily his life, but everything that is important. Batman holds to some set of ideals and struggles to do so.

(I find this discussion amusing, because I believe that Dent died. Even though with Dent's death the Joker still lost. Batman still is who he is, even though that action crossed the line. There is more to our moral fiber than a set of rules.)

This is all I got time for, so back to lurking and working![/quote]

The problem with this is your STILL ignoring CONTEXT. The whole paragraph is about "Does Batman kill, how can he do his job and avoid it, etc.". The question itself was straight up "Let's talk about Dent dying and the Joker not dying at the end". Your interpretation ignores the context of the sentence.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Shryke' post='1465444' date='Aug 1 2008, 12.23']At the time it looks like he's shot, but he has no injuries alter from what I remember. If he'd ACTUALLY been shot, I think he'd still be injured when he comes back like a few days later. I may be wrong on this one though, as I might have missed him being injured.[/quote]
Yeah, I am now doubting my memory, but I could have sworn there was a bullet hole. I will leave the rest alone because I think discussion hinges a little bit about the actions that occurred in the above.

[quote]The problem with this is your STILL ignoring CONTEXT. The whole paragraph is about "Does Batman kill, how can he do his job and avoid it, etc.". The question itself was straight up "Let's talk about Dent dying and the Joker not dying at the end". Your interpretation ignores the context of the sentence.[/quote]

I can see some of what you are saying here. I haven't seen a link (doesn't mean it wasn't posted, might have missed it) with the actual question, if the question is "Why did Dent die and the Joker live at the end?" I would expect Nolan to be much more direct if he didn't want quibbling about it, however he wasn't and left an inference at the end of his statement, when being definitive would work better

My problem is this sentence right here
[quote]And the paradox at the end, the biting part is that he has to save the Joker because he has a chance to, and Harvey Dent pays the price because he's going to kill an innocent. And it's a conundrum.[/quote]

It is just as easy, even better to say this:

[quote]And the paradox at the end, the biting part is that he has to save the Joker because he has a chance to, and [b]he kills[/b] Harvey Dent because he's going to kill an innocent. And it's a conundrum.[/quote]

The latter is much more emotional than the former and leaves out any question. The only reason I see the "phrase-ology" in the former is to leave some kind of inference about what that price that was paid.

Harvey Dent paid alot, and alot of it was from Batman's tab.

I will say though that the same effect is achieved if Batman is willing to perform an action that would kill someone, even if that death is not achieved. Which actually fits with both interpretations.

(Ok, seriously time to work, last time I look at this thread.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear fucking god. Was there actually just 3 pages of that? Not touching the Dent shit. (though he's as alive or dead as the next films writers/directors/producers want him to be. They left more than enough wiggle room)

[quote]Killing the Joker would not be out of character for the Dark Knight. This is not Adam West BAM Batman.[/quote]

It would have been out of character for this incarnation of the dark knight. And I suspect you know that. Your complaints seem...more than a bit misguided.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw it again for the third time last night -

I seem to remember a bullet hole in Gordon's jacket, but most likely he would have been wearing a vest. Center-back shots would have been right over the plate and given him a really good bruise or possibly a cracked rib, but nothing debilitating. Him being up and skippy a few days later is very possible.
The shot impact (especially from that range) would have certainly knocked the wind out of him.
I'm not sure the "20yr" cop was that competent if he couldn't recognize a non-fatal wound or see that the Joker was baiting him in the holding cell. (By the way - the actor was familiar, but I can't place where I've seen him before.)

For the record, I'm not convinced that Dent is dead.



I also have to confess my shame, it took me three times to finally recognize it:

After the Joker leaves Dent's hospital room, he uses the hand sanitizer in the hall.
People in the audience would giggle about it - but I knew it had to be something symbolic, not just something cute/random.

The Joker was done with Dent: finished with pushing him over the edge into madness, finished dismantling his honor code, finished setting him up for his rampage.
The Joker was finished and [i]washed his hands[/i] of Dent.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]I'm not sure the "20yr" cop was that competent if he couldn't recognize a non-fatal wound or see that the Joker was baiting him in the holding cell. (By the way - the actor was familiar, but I can't place where I've seen him before.)[/quote]

To be fair, he was taunting him with the fact that he'd killed 10 of his friends.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Harvey was dead.

The reasons that are being given about why the film is mediocre are mediocre in and of themselves, IMO.

But whatever. Makes no difference to me if someone disliked it or thought the Joker could've easily been killed. I've watched it at least five times (though only once in the theater) and still think it's a brilliant movie that deserves every single superlative used to describe it.

I do think the Scarecrow cameo was wasted, though. A scene between him and the Joker would have been deliciously good fun. I wonder what the Joker would have hallucinated if he had been sprayed by that Scarecrow toxin that shows you your greatest fear? His dad?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='BJ Penn' post='1465643' date='Aug 1 2008, 15.48']I do think the Scarecrow cameo was wasted, though. A scene between him and the Joker would have been deliciously good fun. I wonder what the Joker would have hallucinated if he had been sprayed by that Scarecrow toxin that shows you your greatest fear? His dad?[/quote]

A Scarecrow-Joker scene could have been a lot of fun. I don't think spraying Joker would have been necessary. Crane's fascination with the criminal mind I think would have been enough to enamor him with the Joker.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]I do think the Scarecrow cameo was wasted, though. A scene between him and the Joker would have been deliciously good fun. I wonder what the Joker would have hallucinated if he had been sprayed by that Scarecrow toxin that shows you your greatest fear? His dad?[/quote]

I remember hearing that that happened in one of the comics once, and the toxin didn't do anything to the Joker because he feared nothing... or something like that.
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...