2081 replies to this topic

[killkenny kid]

WOW!

indeed, righty. indeed.

[Vauxhall]

So excited for this movie. After BOND 22, my cinematic highlight of the year will certainly be THE DARK KNIGHT! Great stuff!

[Navy007Fan]

Ledger looks great as Joker!!!! But I can't help thinking he looks like Beetlejuice, must be the smirk!

[dinovelvet]

So it falls to me to be the lone nut who doesn't "get" this then. To me, that picture looks so flat-out ridiculous that I'm convinced it comes from UWE BOLL PRESENTS : BATMAN (A ROGER CORMAN PRODUCTION). If they're going for the kind of look that suggests a teenage Marilyn Manson fan trying to shock his parents, then it worked brilliantly. Otherwise, um, hey well there's a new Indiana Jones movie out next summer, isn't there...

[tdalton]

So it falls to me to be the lone nut who doesn't "get" this then. To me, that picture looks so flat-out ridiculous that I'm convinced it comes from UWE BOLL PRESENTS : BATMAN (A ROGER CORMAN PRODUCTION). If they're going for the kind of look that suggests a teenage Marilyn Manson fan trying to shock his parents, then it worked brilliantly. Otherwise, um, hey well there's a new Indiana Jones movie out next summer, isn't there...

Completely agreed. This new photo of the Joker does absolutely nothing to inspire any confidence that they are headed in the right direction with this film. Hopefully Harvey Dent turns into Two-Face in this film to provide this film with a recognizable Batman villain (hopefully, assuming that they get his character correct), because this picture of the look that they're going for with the Joker is a bit over the top, but not in a particularly good way.

[Harmsway]

Well, TDalton, Dent does turn into Two-Face in this film.

But I think the Joker is entirely recognizable, just dark... as his character has been portrayed in the comics. It definitely strikes me as a more grounded take on the Joker from ARKHAM ASYLUM: A SERIOUS HOUSE ON A SERIOUS EARTH (my favorite take on the Joker, personally, and apparently a big influence on Ledger):



But as far as his film portrayal, I don't really see what's not to like about this visual interpretation. It's grounded and scary, as well as oddly quirky... what more could I ask for from Nolan's take?

Furthermore, the Joker doesn't look exactly like that picture for the whole of the film. That's after he's been imprisoned after an intense vehicular accident... so his facial appearance is a bit more screwed up than it is elsewhere throughout the film. The Joker's appearance deteriorates throughout the film as his make-up sort of rots away and his hair grows out.

[Navy007Fan]

So it falls to me to be the lone nut who doesn't "get" this then. To me, that picture looks so flat-out ridiculous that I'm convinced it comes from UWE BOLL PRESENTS : BATMAN (A ROGER CORMAN PRODUCTION). If they're going for the kind of look that suggests a teenage Marilyn Manson fan trying to shock his parents, then it worked brilliantly. Otherwise, um, hey well there's a new Indiana Jones movie out next summer, isn't there...

If you base your views on this pic alone, I can see your point. But if you add in other images, interviews, etc., it paints a better picture.

[tdalton]

Furthermore, the Joker doesn't look exactly like that picture for the whole of the film. That's after he's been imprisoned after an intense vehicular accident... so his facial appearance is a bit more screwed up than it is elsewhere throughout the film. The Joker's appearance deteriorates throughout the film as his make-up sort of rots away and his hair grows out.

This is a fair point to make, and judging from other pictures does appear to be the case. Probably my biggest problem with this magazine cover is that, IMO, the purpose of such a picture is to get people excited about the character returning in a live-action film for the first time since Tim Burton's Batman. I understand that this picture is from at some point after the Joker has been roughed up a bit, but I would think that it would be in the best interest of the film to put their best foot forward when revealing the character on the cover of a magazine, and I'm not sure that this picture accomplishes that. This take on the character is almost assuredly going to be a darker, more serious take on the character than Jack Nicholson's interpretation, and that's the correct direction to move in, but I would think that for a magazine cover like this, that a picture showing a more traditional looking Joker, perhaps something from that scene with Maggie Gylenhaal that we've seen in the pictures, would be better for selling this interpretation of the character to the audience.

[Harmsway]

This take on the character is almost assuredly going to be a darker, more serious take on the character than Jack Nicholson's interpretation, and that's the correct direction to move in, but I would think that for a magazine cover like this, that a picture showing a more traditional looking Joker, perhaps something from that scene with Maggie Gylenhaal that we've seen in the pictures, would be better for selling this interpretation of the character to the audience.

I disagree.

The best way to sell this interpretation of the Joker to the audience is to distance him from Nicholson as far as they can, to avoid comparison and to avoid people making comments like, "Well, he won't be as good as Nicholson was." They need to make entirely clear that this Joker isn't the one people are familiar with, that there's nothing "same-old, same-old" about it. They need to demonstrate that Ledger's Joker isn't what people expect and that there's something genuinely new and interesting to bring to the table.

Furthermore, the whole "shock tactic" approach seems to be working. You seem to be one of the few with a problem with it. Otherwise, it's created oodles of buzz, and the response has been very positive.

[Jim]

Another year, another EMPIRE cover photo for people to work themselves up over; wasn't it during the middle of last year EMPIRE had Daniel Craig with that oversized gun on the cover and folks went off into weird places about that; turned out OK, didn't it?

This all looks very jolly but if the film is going to be as long as is threatened, I am afraid I will have to pass and leave it to DVD.

[Harmsway]

[sharpshooter]

That is one of the better Joker pictures we have seen. He looks like he is not pleased to see the Bat.

[bond 16.05.72]

I'm delighted by Nolan's/ Ledger's look. I agree they need to distance themselves as much from Nicholson vastly overrated take on Batman's most famous nemesis.

The argument that this isn't working is the same with those who didn't feel Craig looked like Bond in the stills that emerged before CR was released.

Yes Craig looked vastly different from Brosnan's usual cliched smug look but he looked dangerous.

Whenever I see Craig now I think he screams Bond, the way he fills those 3 pieces out and the look.

The cruel face and blue eyed stare he's clearly the most dangerous looking Bond to date and with the not so no neck look 22 we could see the defintive Bond look.

Ledger's look for me is not unexpected knowing Nolan's thinking but it is quite shocking and that's superb. Ledger looks like a raving nutter and if his performance conveys the same feel we could have one of the best Cinematic Villains of all time with depth.

Not some unthreatening 50+ actor who was more like a clown than anything threatening. People may continue to think of Nicholsons look as the definitive Joker but it's Ledger's take that will reflect the crueler more effective villain that will be worthy of Nolan's reboot.

[Professor Dent]

I'm delighted by Nolan's/ Ledger's look. I agree they need to distance themselves as much from Nicholson vastly overrated take on Batman's most famous nemesis.

Well said.

[Harmsway]

New Batman and Joker promo pics (I'm not all that crazy about them, to be honest, but these kind of promo pics are always a bit lackluster due to how overlit they are).

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/34945

[Vauxhall]

Not the best pictures (the plain white background isn't great) but certainly reaffirms the change in tone for the Joker character.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Not the best pictures (the plain white background isn't great) but certainly reaffirms the change in tone for the Joker character.

Heath Ledger looks like a drunken bum clown....


...which is what they were going for, I guess.

[Qwerty]

The last two are pretty good from that set. Definitely looks like quite the disturbed villain.

[Number 6]

Couldn't they have used a more dramatic background or color for these? A couple of those Joker pics look cool though...

[Harmsway]

Teaser poster:



Also, Nolan confirmed that the running time of THE DARK KNIGHT would be about 140 minutes.

[Number 6]

Teaser poster:



Also, Nolan confirmed that the running time of THE DARK KNIGHT would be about 140 minutes.

This legit? If so, I've got to get this one. I love it.

[Righty007]

That's ing awesome!

[sharpshooter]

It serves it's purpose as a teaser poster.

It gives the title, tagline and year of release. It also features a bloodied Bat symbol, showing the madness of the Joker.

I also love the tagline of the film 'Why so Serious' - being taken from the viral campaigns. It just seems to summarise the character of the Joker and his view on Batman.

I like it.

[killkenny kid]

140 mins. Great news.``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

OK, what happened here?
```!``````````````````````````````

[Professor Dent]

The teaser poster looks awesome.

[Harmsway]

This legit? If so, I've got to get this one. I love it.

It's 100% legit.

[Tarl_Cabot]

That's ing awesome!

agreed. Excellent.Less is more.

[Vauxhall]

That teaser poster is awesome!

[MR. BOND 93]

There is just no way that this movie could possibly be bad in any way.

Edited by MR. BOND 93, 05 December 2007 - 02:56 AM.

[Tarl_Cabot]

It's always possible but dumping Katie Holmes improves the probability that it will be a damn good film.