2081 replies to this topic

[Loomis]

And where were the "INDY IV will be three hours" rumors? I missed 'em.

I think it was something I read on one of the fansites - didn't seem anything more than someone just idly speculating, though.

Anyway, Loomis, you'll be happy to hear that according to the folks who saw the DARK KNIGHT footage at Wizard World, Nolan's changed up the visual approach to Batman a bit, and so the look we're getting is closer to the visual approach he gave THE PRESTIGE (which was, IMO, fantastic, and much better than the BEGINS visual approach).

Well, I haven't seen THE PRESTIGE (and most likely won't, since I know the twists and the reviews I've read were negative), but I'm pleased that THE DARK KNIGHT will take a different visual approach to that of BATMAN BEGINS, which has too much of a murky look for my liking. I hope the action will be shot and edited much better, too.

[Professor Dent]

Wow, at three hours long, they are venturing into dangerous territory. That's a lot of screen time to fill & a lot of opportunity for the story to get convoluted. Is Peter Jackson a guest director or something?

[Harmsway]

Well, I haven't seen THE PRESTIGE (and most likely won't, since I know the twists and the reviews I've read were negative),

I don't think you'd care for THE PRESTIGE, but I love it. I think it's great, and I have yet to meet a person who saw it and didn't like it.

I hope the action will be shot and edited much better, too.

It was only some brief footage that was premiered at Wizard World, but those who saw it indicated that the action seemed to be clearer. Nothing definite, but we'll see.

[Loomis]

Well, I haven't seen THE PRESTIGE (and most likely won't, since I know the twists and the reviews I've read were negative),

I don't think you'd care for THE PRESTIGE, but I love it. I think it's great, and I have yet to meet a person who saw it and didn't like it.

For me, Nolan's best film is still FOLLOWING (BTW, wouldn't it be great to have some sections of a Batman outing in B&W?). I quite like INSOMNIA, although the script is a mess. MEMENTO I passed on, and BATMAN BEGINS I find good but deeply flawed. Basically, I'm not really a fan. However, if THE DARK KNIGHT is half as good as you seem to think it is, count me as looking forward to it.

[Harmsway]

For me, Nolan's best film is still FOLLOWING (BTW, wouldn't it be great to have some sections of a Batman outing in B&W?).

That's the only one I haven't seen.

I quite like INSOMNIA, although the script is a mess.

Yeah, it's pretty good.

MEMENTO I passed on,

Oh, I quite like that one.

and BATMAN BEGINS I find good but deeply flawed.

A pretty good description.

However, if THE DARK KNIGHT is half as good as you seem to think it is, count me as looking forward to it.

Well, I hope it's half as good as I seem to think it is, too.

[Loomis]

For me, Nolan's best film is still FOLLOWING (BTW, wouldn't it be great to have some sections of a Batman outing in B&W?).

That's the only one I haven't seen.

I'm stunned. Is it hard to come by in the States? I think you'd like it.

MEMENTO I passed on,

Oh, I quite like that one.

I know it's stupid, but I'm a Leonard Maltin disciple, and anything he slates I'm likely to pass on. There are exceptions, of course: I ignore his *1/2 ratings for BLADE RUNNER and FIRST BLOOD, for instance, but generally I find his tastes reflect my own.

Well, I hope it's half as good as I seem to think it is, too.

LOL. Touch

[dinovelvet]

This is a really epic story with a complexity never before seen in a superhero film.

Why do these words strike me with dread? I guess they come across as similar to Eon's "We're making a darker Bond film this time, and peeling back the layers of the characters, and there will be 'Bond women' instead of 'Bond girls'" patter, i.e. the sort of thing that makers of superhero movies seem to say every time out.

Although I do appreciate that it's not coming from the mouth of someone involved with THE DARK KNIGHT.

Ha, I also get a bit of that same feeling when I start reading things like that. Epic and complex sounds good on paper, but on film it could easily turn into pretentious, masturbatory, and overblown, a la Ang Lee's Hulk.
I dunno, I'm probably not even going to see it. I've found Heath Ledger to be a terrible, mumbling, non-charismatic presence in every thing I've seen him in. I was momentarily intrigued the other day to discover Eric Roberts was in the movie, which seems like a completely out of left field Tarantino style casting. I'd be much more interested if Eric Roberts was playing the joker!
I'm probably just done with superhero movies in general, with the exception of another Superman movie, as that's got a lot of nostalgia value for me, and the intriguing possibility of the new rebooted Hulk with Edward Norton and Tim Roth(!)

[marktmurphy]

Well, I haven't seen THE PRESTIGE (and most likely won't, since I know the twists and the reviews I've read were negative),

I don't think you'd care for THE PRESTIGE, but I love it. I think it's great, and I have yet to meet a person who saw it and didn't like it.

Hello. I know we haven't actually met, but I thought it was absolutely appallingly stupid and treated the audience as if they were a barrelful of monkeys, unable to understand anything unless it was written on the screen in big letters, with each 'twist' signposted about an hour before its 'big' (i.e wholly expected) reveal. I found it quite insulting, actually, and left the cinema feeling pretty annoyed.

[Harmsway]

Hello. I know we haven't actually met, but I thought it was absolutely appallingly stupid and treated the audience as if they were a barrelful of monkeys, unable to understand anything unless it was written on the screen in big letters, with each 'twist' signposted about an hour before its 'big' (i.e wholly expected) reveal. I found it quite insulting, actually, and left the cinema feeling pretty annoyed.

Suit yourself. You can't please everyone. :::shrugs:::

I'm shocked you found all the twists so easy to predict (the only one I figured out was the final twist), and I don't like to think of myself as an oblivious movie watcher. But even so, I've found the movie stands on its own apart from the twists - I've enjoyed it more on rewatches than I did the first time.

Behold!

[Tarl_Cabot]

Nice pics Harms.

I also wasn't thrilled by the Prestige. I hated the 'twist'. The movie should have remained within plausible reality and just totally lost me with that surprise.

[Harmsway]

Nice pics Harms.

They are, aren't they? I like how Batman's getting brutal with the Joker in the interrogation room.

I also wasn't thrilled by the Prestige. I hated the 'twist'. The movie should have remained within plausible reality and just totally lost me with that surprise.

Which twist are we talking about? I assume the twist you're mentioning is the one re: Bale's character's trick.

[Tarl_Cabot]

Jackman's trick...the teleporting/clone suicide thing.

I'm a little surprised by how low tech the Joker's make up looks. Surprised but not dissapointed.

Oops.typo.

[Harmsway]

Jackman's trick...the teleporting/clone suicide thing.

Well, that wasn't really much of a story twist, so that's why I didn't know if you were thinking about that. I guessed you were, though, with the implausible comment.

And personally, I liked that element of the film. THE PRESTIGE is essentially fantasy, after all, and that was made clear by its trailer (which put out there that somebody was doing what other magicians pretended to do). I liked that its brand of fantasy was found in extreme science, though, and from a historical figure who is truly every bit as extraordinary as the fictional device (if there was ever a man who could design such a device, it really was Tesla, who was a genius beyond compare).

I guess some people just don't like fantasy when it's treated with a straight face.

I'm a little surprised by how low tech the Joker's make up looks. Surprised but dissapointed.

Well, it's low tech pretty intentionally. The Joker applies it himself, and he does it in a sloppy fashion (denoting his crazy nature). What's so disappointing about that?

[freemo]

Thanks for the updates Harmsway. Keep 'em coming.

(I hope not. For me, movies of this type should be 120 minutes or so, tops.)

Yeah, there's been alot of these movies of late that should be 110-120 mins but have wound up being 140-150 mins, still going on good 15 minutes after you've had enough. But 3 hours of The Dark Knight is fine by me, as it sounds like it actually has 3 hours of story to tell.

The 3-4 villains thing will be interesting. Personally I think Two-Face needs his own film, but everything about TDK looks and sounds so good, I'm just going to trust in what they're doing.

[Agent 76]

In the images, the ones where we see the tumbler and some electronic equipment, is it the batcave or the Tech Department at Wayne Enterprises ?

[The Dove]

Kick pics!!! WOW!! Thanks, Harmsway!!!

[Harmsway]

In the images, the ones where we see the tumbler and some electronic equipment, is it the batcave or the Tech Department at Wayne Enterprises ?

Neither. Wayne Manor is still being rebuilt, so Bruce Wayne is living in a penthouse with a cool basement thingy in it. That's the penthouse's temporary "batcave," if you will.

The 3-4 villains thing will be interesting. Personally I think Two-Face needs his own film, but everything about TDK looks and sounds so good, I'm just going to trust in what they're doing.

Well Two-Face's most iconic origin story (and the biggest influence on Nolan's idea of Batman), THE LONG HALLOWEEN, is a story featuring *many* villains in prominent roles: Joker, Scarecrow, Mad Hatter, Riddler, Catwoman, Poison Ivy, Calendar Man, Solomon Grundy, Carmine "The Roman" Falcone, Salvatore Maroni, Alberto Falcone... THE DARK KNIGHT is much less crowded.

So if the comic pulled it off, I have no doubt that Christopher Nolan can pull it off.

[killkenny kid]

So true, Harm. btw thank for the kickass pics.

[Agent 76]

In the images, the ones where we see the tumbler and some electronic equipment, is it the batcave or the Tech Department at Wayne Enterprises ?

Neither. Wayne Manor is still being rebuilt, so Bruce Wayne is living in a penthouse with a cool basement thingy in it. That's the penthouse's temporary "batcave," if you will.

very cool, I like the way it looks, the ceiling is amazing.

ps: thanks for the tip.

[marktmurphy]

Hello. I know we haven't actually met, but I thought it was absolutely appallingly stupid and treated the audience as if they were a barrelful of monkeys, unable to understand anything unless it was written on the screen in big letters, with each 'twist' signposted about an hour before its 'big' (i.e wholly expected) reveal. I found it quite insulting, actually, and left the cinema feeling pretty annoyed.

Suit yourself. You can't please everyone. :::shrugs:::

I'm shocked you found all the twists so easy to predict (the only one I figured out was the final twist), and I don't like to think of myself as an oblivious movie watcher. But even so, I've found the movie stands on its own apart from the twists - I've enjoyed it more on rewatches than I did the first time.

Yes; everything. The one bit that really sticks in my throat is the message that Londoner Michael Caine gives Londoner Hugh Jackman in a London pub which tells him to meet Londoner Caine at the address '15 Aldwych, London'. Yes, thank you- I know we're in London; I'm not stupid. Even the group of little girls who were nattering to each other most of the way through had predicted all of the 'twists'; it really was tiring.

[Harmsway]

The one bit that really sticks in my throat is the message that Londoner Michael Caine gives Londoner Hugh Jackman in a London pub which tells him to meet Londoner Caine at the address '15 Aldwych, London'.

Fair enough, but wholly forgiveable, IMO.

:::shrugs:::

I still love it.

[marktmurphy]

Not for me; contempt for your audience is contempt for your audience.

[Harmsway]

Not for me; contempt for your audience is contempt for your audience.

It's been a while since I've seen THE PRESTIGE, but are we entirely sure that the pub was actually in London itself? I just looked over the script, and actually, the script never specifies where the pub actually is.

[Loomis]

Thing is, though, any Londoner would know that Aldwych was in London. It's a glaringly we-gotta-write-this-stuff-for-absolute-dummies line.

It's one thing that grated when I saw THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM, those titles informing the viewer that the scene has shifted to "London, England" or "Madrid, Spain". Sheesh.

[Harmsway]

Thing is, though, any Londoner would know that Aldwych was in London. It's a glaringly we-gotta-write-this-stuff-for-absolute-dummies line.

It's one thing that grated when I saw THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM, those titles informing the viewer that the scene has shifted to "London, England" or "Madrid, Spain". Sheesh.

Fair enough, then. It's not actually a line, though... just an address written on a bit of card. I find it wholly forgiveable as a film element, just as those BOURNE ULTIMATUM subtitles you cite.

[Qwerty]

Love the new pics, Harmsway.

[marktmurphy]

Thing is, though, any Londoner would know that Aldwych was in London. It's a glaringly we-gotta-write-this-stuff-for-absolute-dummies line.

It's one thing that grated when I saw THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM, those titles informing the viewer that the scene has shifted to "London, England" or "Madrid, Spain". Sheesh.

You don't even have to know that, though. If the film was set in Glasgow and the card said '15 Georges Street' (I have no idea if there's a Georges St in Glasgow or not) and the next shot showed our hero strolling up to the theatre, we'd be able to figure out that it's in the same city and he hasn't crossed continents. It reminds me of those French & Saunders period drama spoofs which had a man on a Penny Farthing riding past no matter which period it was set in.

[sharpshooter]

It's one thing that grated when I saw THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM, those titles informing the viewer that the scene has shifted to "London, England" or "Madrid, Spain".

What is wrong with that? It is a commonplace film technique isnt it?

[Loomis]

What's wrong with it is that it should just be "London" and "Madrid" - it's as though the filmmakers are assuming that the audience is so thick as to be unaware that London is in England and Madrid is in Spain.

[Jim]

What's wrong with it is that it should just be "London" and "Madrid" - it's as though the filmmakers are assuming that the audience is so thick as to be unaware that London is in England and Madrid is in Spain.

Gets to the point that if (say) The Houses of Parliament are shown, does one even need a caption asserting "London"?

It does become very irritating; although it does help me distinguish between the London in England and the one on The Moon.