The Dark Knight

[kujo]

[spoiler]I dunno if he's dead...they could've locked him in Arkham and lied about him being dead in order to preserve his name (or his [b]face[/b]) and, thus, martrying him.Could keep him inspirational.[/spoiler]

Edited July 22, 2008 by kujo

[dairygirl4u2c]

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKa-aDga1fE"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKa-aDga1fE[/url]

[kujo]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1604919' date='Jul 21 2008, 11:57 PM'][url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKa-aDga1fE"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKa-aDga1fE[/url][/quote]

He was really fidgetty in that interview, like he was jonesing or something.

[dairygirl4u2c]

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkromR5LR6s&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkromR5LR6s...feature=related[/url]

[ardillacid]

[quote name='kujo' post='1604925' date='Jul 21 2008, 11:01 PM']He was really fidgetty in that interview, like he was jonesing or something.[/quote]
Yeah I bet he was trippin' :coagulated milk:

[Not A Mallard]

[quote name='rkwright' post='1604760' date='Jul 21 2008, 07:57 PM']Do the films link together at all? Not just Batman Begins, but say the first batman?[/quote]
No. Batman Begins was a reboot.

[DemonSlayer]

It was pretty good, but I agree that the ending was a bit flat and the film was mainly about Harvey Dent and the Joker, and not as much about Batman. I think it very unlikely that Nolan will include Robin since it is not realistic enough for him to have a kid to be following Batman around. For the next villains, I'd most like to see Bane, Killer Croc and Man-Bat, although the last two would be very unlikely to appear in any Batman films by Christopher Nolan.

[Socrates]

Holy spoiler black-outs, Batman!
[quote name='aalpha1989' post='1603690' date='Jul 19 2008, 10:16 PM']I saw it yesterday. It was really really good. I was really surprised that [spoiler]two face died at the end. Who's gonna be the villain in the next one? That young guy in Wayne's company is obviously gonna be Robin. Is Rachel really dead? Cause wasn't there a brief scene of her on a gurney (sp?)? Idk.

I think Maroney's gonna be the Riddler. [/spoiler][/quote]
Dead wrong on both counts.
Christopher Nolan's said he wouldn't do a movie with Robin, but he hasn't said whether or not he'll direct a sequel.
However whether or not Robin appears in a future installment, it certainly will not be that character (if you're talking about the guy who wanted to blackmail Batman). There's been 3 Robins in the comics (Johnsonville brat Grayson, Jason Todd, and Tim Drake), and this guy is none of him. Plus he's way too old and totally out of character for a Robin. He's a greedy, self-centered, slightly pudgy 30ish man, not a boy daredevil.

While I'd definitely prefer there not to be a Robin or similar sidekick in the movies, it wouldn't necessarily be a disaster if handled right. The story of Batman reluctantly taking charge of a young pupil could have a certain resonance - however Robin should be a kid of about 12 - no 22-year-old Robins, and none of the homoerotic nipple croutons!

And, no, Maroni will not be the Riddler. Mob boss Salvatore Maroni and the Riddler ("Edward Nigma") are two completely different characters in the comics, and co-exist in [i]The Long Halloween[/i].

[quote name='kujo' post='1604185' date='Jul 20 2008, 07:12 PM'][spoiler]I am glad that she died. A) she is not a "real" character B) was not particularly engaging. Furthermore, after seeing it again, it is my view that the only weak part of the movie was the love-triangle they weaved between her, Deny and Bruce. They should've stuck to the Harvey Dent story from [i]The Longest Halloween[/i] where he was married and had a young child, just like Gordon. It seemed unnecessary to create this schoolboy feud between Bruce and Dent over Rachel.

But, anyway, I'm grasping at straws. The movie was STILL the best movie I've seen in years.[/spoiler][/quote]
As one reviewer put it, Rachel was more of a plot device than a character, and after Begins, I was actually hoping they'd kill her off in the next installment. (Though I find Maggie whats-her-face less annoying and more convincing than the miscast Katie Homes, even if she is less pretty). I really didn't mind the whole love triangle thing though - I thought the plot device worked to bring together different aspects of the story in a single movie. The whole [i]Long Halloween[/i] plot would have been a bit too long and involved to work as a sub-plot to this already plot-heavy movie.
I felt the whole Two-Face sequence towards the end probably deserved a movie to itself to be developed fully, rather than squeezed into a movie in which the Joker played such a major role, but no major complaints.

[quote name='Era Might' post='1604198' date='Jul 20 2008, 07:31 PM']It was a good movie. Not a life-changing movie, but it was good.

[spoiler]I did not like the ending for two reasons. First, I just thought it was kind of flat. But also, from a moral perspective, he should not have lied. The ends do not justify the means.

There were a few other things in the movie that I did not like from a moral perspective, such as Bruce Wayne's public persona as a bachelor with no restraints.[/spoiler]

The Joker performance was amazing. [spoiler]I was thinking at the end that the Joker was still alive, so he could return in the next movie. But then I remembered what happened to Heath Ledger. They could cast a new actor, but I don't know if it would be the same.[/spoiler][/quote]
[spoiler]The ending was maybe slightly morally problematic, though it wasn't quite so bad because it was more about honoring the good name of a dead man, rather than in covering for one's current misdeeds.[/spoiler] The ending did set a nicely dark and sober mood imo - giving the film a certain gravitas and ambiguity, different from the more predictable "happy ending" of [i]Batman Begins[/i] (the final portents of "escalation" notwithstanding).

As for Bruce's public "spoiled playboy" persona, that's hardly an innovation of this movie, but the way the character's always been in the comics. His fake public persona helps hide his true nature and identity, and contrasts with his true personality as the Batman. The idea is that he is someone who appears so shallow, self-absorbed and decadent that he would seem incapable of serious heroism. Besides, it's part of what makes the character fun.
This kind of "rich-playboy-fop-by-day, daring-hero-by-night" dual personality is part of a venerable tradition which predates Batman. Batman was inspired by Zorro, which was influenced by The Scarlet Pimpernel.

Edit: "Johnsonville brat Grayson"! Holy Ridiculous Internet Censorship, Batman!

Edited July 24, 2008 by Socrates

[Socrates]

Best. Bat-flick. Evar.

Far and away the best comic-book superhero-based movie, and one of the greatest action movies, period! Exciting, genuinely suspenseful, as well as intelligently written and thought-provoking.
Very dark and disturbing, yet heroic, and ultimately affirming of morality.

Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker is all it was cracked up to be; his Joker is one of the great movie villains of all time - pure vile demonic evil.

[Era Might]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1606970' date='Jul 23 2008, 11:24 PM']The ending did set a nicely dark and sober mood imo - giving the film a certain gravitas and ambiguity, different from the more predictable "happy ending" of Batman Begins (the final portents of "escalation" notwithstanding).[/quote]
[spoiler]I thought the lead up to the end was great, especially the scene with the Joker dangling from the side of the building, taunting Batman for choosing justice over vengeance. But the very end didn't leave me in expectation. At least Batman Begins ended with the Joker card. What are we left to wait for after The Dark Knight? We already saw Bruce Wayne battle his inner demons in Batman Begins, which was one of the reasons why I liked that movie, and we saw him mature into Batman in The Dark Knight, and face the most evil character possible. What is next?[/spoiler]

[quote]The idea is that he is someone who appears so shallow, self-absorbed and decadent that he would seem incapable of serious heroism. Besides, it's part of what makes the character fun.[/quote]
Yes, I understand the purpose of that aspect of his character, but does that make it moral? I agree that it is not something unique to The Dark Knight. It is something which I have a problem with in a lot of movies, how plots are sometimes based on lies and similar choices which would be immoral in real life. I guess the question is whether there is a moral suspension of disbelief to a certain extent in movies and literature? I'm not sure. I went to see the movie with people who are not religious, so that is part of the reason why it bothers me, because I feel like I need to explain to them why those aspects of the movie would be morally wrong in the real world. It may be obvious to me, as a Christian, but others might conclude that those aspects of the movie are perfectly moral, even in real life.

[kujo]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1607040' date='Jul 24 2008, 12:59 AM']Yes, I understand the purpose of that aspect of his character, but does that make it moral? I agree that it is not something unique to The Dark Knight. It is something which I have a problem with in a lot of movies, how plots are sometimes based on lies and similar choices which would be immoral in real life. I guess the question is whether there is a moral suspension of disbelief to a certain extent in movies and literature? I'm not sure. I went to see the movie with people who are not religious, so that is part of the reason why it bothers me, because I feel like I need to explain to them why those aspects of the movie would be morally wrong in the real world. It may be obvious to me, as a Christian, but others might conclude that those aspects of the movie are perfectly moral, even in real life.[/quote]

I don't think you need to "explain" to your friends why the public persona of Bruce Wayne is "immoral." I think his behavior stands on its own as overly-indulgent and decadent. It is depicted in the movie as something that is held against him rather than something that glorifies him.

[jmjtina]

I think this also brings to question, which is more important, your actions or what others think they know about you?

this is also similar to the wedding dress thread in the debate table.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1606996' date='Jul 23 2008, 10:39 PM']Best. Bat-flick. Evar.

Far and away the best comic-book superhero-based movie, and one of the greatest action movies, period! Exciting, genuinely suspenseful, as well as intelligently written and thought-provoking.
Very dark and disturbing, yet heroic, and ultimately affirming of morality.

Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker is all it was cracked up to be; his Joker is one of the great movie villains of all time - pure vile demonic evil.[/quote]


But what did you think of Maggie Gyllensomething? [Edit: I see you posted a comment about this already. Nvrmd.]

Anybody have any thoughts on the female star in this one? I haven't liked ANY of the past Batman ladies--but Katie Holmes was the worst. Nicole Kidman was pretty bad, too. At least Maggie seemed like a real adult woman and not some silly tart.

Edited July 24, 2008 by Madame Vengier

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1604919' date='Jul 21 2008, 09:57 PM'][url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKa-aDga1fE"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKa-aDga1fE[/url][/quote]


How sad. I had seen that interview right after he died. He's totally on something there. The fidgeting and scratching are signs. But, in his defense, he was always a bad interview. I don't think he ever felt comfortble with that aspect of fame and he always came across as alternately bored and annoyed in interviews. The difference was that he wasn't always fidgeting and scratching and laughing in a silly way. When sober in interviews he was very serious, very composed but it was just really obvious that he didn't want to be doing it. I am sure journalists had a hard time with him.

[Not A Mallard]

I had a dream that I saw this movie.