2081 replies to this topic

[Judo chop]

If it isn't a great improvement on BEGINS, then I very much doubt that I'll enjoy it at all.

I can promise that it is, in many ways, a great departure from BEGINS. You may like it, love it or loathe it in comparison to BEGINS, but this is certainly not the Gotham you saw in 2005.

[Loomis]

If it isn't a great improvement on BEGINS, then I very much doubt that I'll enjoy it at all.

I can promise that it is, in many ways, a great departure from BEGINS. You may like it, love it or loathe it in comparison to BEGINS, but this is certainly not the Gotham you saw in 2005.

From what little I've seen, it looks a much more realistic Gotham, in other words that it's a living, breathing, modern city (complete with Starbucks, no less!).... and that's a vision of Gotham I'd welcome with open arms and almost suffocate with all-consuming love. I hated the fakeness of the Gotham of BATMAN BEGINS. It was like Coruscant in the STAR WARS prequels, really.

And, basically, I wasn't that keen on BATMAN BEGINS, full stop. So if it's a great departure, then all I can say is:

I. Am. So. There.

[Judo chop]

Good luck and perhaps keep your optimism in check.

(If it's not too late! )

ps. It's CHICAGO. To the outsider, it's probably 'like' Chicago. To a Chicagoan... oh yeah. A little too close to home for comfort maybe.

[Tarl_Cabot]

They completely canned the CGI enhancements of Chicago this time around. It's just Chicago...in fact, in scenes inside an office you can see a sign outside that says CHICAGO. Gotham looks like a normal city.

[Mister E]

the intelligent and terrific CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER trumped the silly and dull PATRIOT GAMES.

I agree CAPD was better then PG, but I never found the latter silly or dull. I think my only complaint was that the plot was too simple.

[Judo chop]

They completely canned the CGI enhancements of Chicago this time around. It's just Chicago...in fact, in scenes inside an office you can see a sign outside that says CHICAGO. Gotham looks like a normal city.

Yeah. Call me crazy, but there was a little too much windy in the city for my taste. I would have preferred a middle ground between BB and TDK. They totally cut their ties with BEGINS. Wayne manor has no place in the film and I don’t recall a single mention of ‘the Narrows’ that was so critical at the wrap up of the previous film. I was hoping for a little more of the ‘continuation’ aspect, but what we really get is BATMAN BEGINS... AGAIN.

[HildebrandRarity]

Not to dispute Hildebrand's claims that the action is messy and hard to follow - I'm sure there's a bit of that in there, indeed more than a bit (I found the action in BATMAN BEGINS either incomprehensible or dull or both). But I'll tell ya: the chase clips of TDK that I saw look amazing.... and shot very nicely and stylishly (but not ostentatiously so).

Wait a minute! I did not say the whole movie was messy. I said the bat-mobile, bat-cycle/pod sequence was a bit muddled. I think it was either poorly lit or poorly filmed or the CGI was sub par and I felt 'cheated' in relation to, say, Casino Royale's night action pieces. As a pure comparison, the Miami International and Aston Martin flip sequences in CR were extremely well lit and executed.

[Harmsway]

Wayne manor has no place in the film

Well sure. It needed to be rebuilt, and now was a perfect time to draw from that period in 70s Batman comics where Wayne started living in a penthouse.

and I don’t recall a single mention of ‘the Narrows’ that was so critical at the wrap up of the previous film.

Was one really necessary? At any rate, they handled the Narrows in BATMAN: GOTHAM KNIGHT, which spans the length of time between the two films. The entire Narrows has been taken over by Arkham Asylum, so that it's now an island-wide compound.

[Tarl_Cabot]

They completely canned the CGI enhancements of Chicago this time around. It's just Chicago...in fact, in scenes inside an office you can see a sign outside that says CHICAGO. Gotham looks like a normal city.

Yeah. Call me crazy, but there was a little too much windy in the city for my taste. I would have preferred a middle ground between BB and TDK. They totally cut their ties with BEGINS. Wayne manor has no place in the film and I don’t recall a single mention of ‘the Narrows’ that was so critical at the wrap up of the previous film. I was hoping for a little more of the ‘continuation’ aspect, but what we really get is BATMAN BEGINS... AGAIN.

Well, I miss the windy city so I ate it up like In n Out Burger!

I'll be back in town next month...looking forward to it.

[Judo chop]

Wayne manor has no place in the film

Well sure. It needed to be rebuilt, and now was a perfect time to draw from that period in 70s Batman comics where Wayne started living in a penthouse.

and I don’t recall a single mention of ‘the Narrows’ that was so critical at the wrap up of the previous film.

Was one really necessary? At any rate, they handled the Narrows in BATMAN: GOTHAM KNIGHT, which spans the length of time between the two films. The entire Narrows has been taken over by Arkham Asylum, so that it's now an island-wide compound.

If TDK is meant to be a continuation of BB, then yes, I think the narrows is necessary to include, or is at least silly to ignore. There's that nice (if unprompted) wrap-up dialogue in Begins where Gordon talks about how 'the Narrows is lost' and you get the sense of this den of scum and villainy festering off the shore of Gotham from whence all chaos, including the Joker, springs.

In TDK there's no separation of territories. Just Gotham as a whole getting better, then suddenly getting worse.

More an observation than a complaint. Do you think the next Batman, if there is one, will move the hero back to the Wayne Manor? I suppose that would make sense considering Batman's new 'image' to the people of Gotham.

[The Dove]

They completely canned the CGI enhancements of Chicago this time around. It's just Chicago...in fact, in scenes inside an office you can see a sign outside that says CHICAGO. Gotham looks like a normal city.

Yeah. Call me crazy, but there was a little too much windy in the city for my taste. I would have preferred a middle ground between BB and TDK. They totally cut their ties with BEGINS. Wayne manor has no place in the film and I don’t recall a single mention of ‘the Narrows’ that was so critical at the wrap up of the previous film. I was hoping for a little more of the ‘continuation’ aspect, but what we really get is BATMAN BEGINS... AGAIN.

I'm with you on this Judo Chop.. I guess I went into the film expecting everything to be the same as it was in Batman Begins. However, you take away this expectation, I think that you can enjoy Dark Knight a whole lot more. I'll be seeing it again this weekend and with that expectation gone, I'm sure I'll enjoy it a whole lot more.

But yeah, I missed Wayne Manor, but can totally understand that it hasn't been rebuilt yet. I also missed the Narrows but thinking about it, Batman Begins really only focused on the section of the city the whole film, so when we see a much bigger Gotham in The Dark Knight, I was sort of taken aback.. So I'd be interested to hear your thoughts if you see the film again, Judo Chop..

[Judo chop]

So I'd be interested to hear your thoughts if you see the film again, Judo Chop..

me too!

[Harmsway]

More an observation than a complaint. Do you think the next Batman, if there is one, will move the hero back to the Wayne Manor? I suppose that would make sense considering Batman's new 'image' to the people of Gotham.

Yes. I'm pretty sure, at any rate, given Alfred's comments about looking forward to Wayne Manor being restored and seeing the cave again.

And we'd probably see the Narrows (or Arkham, rather, since the whole island is just the institution at this point), as inmates come flooding in to Arkham.

[DR76]

They completely canned the CGI enhancements of Chicago this time around. It's just Chicago...in fact, in scenes inside an office you can see a sign outside that says CHICAGO. Gotham looks like a normal city.

Yeah. Call me crazy, but there was a little too much windy in the city for my taste. I would have preferred a middle ground between BB and TDK. They totally cut their ties with BEGINS. Wayne manor has no place in the film and I don’t recall a single mention of ‘the Narrows’ that was so critical at the wrap up of the previous film. I was hoping for a little more of the ‘continuation’ aspect, but what we really get is BATMAN BEGINS... AGAIN.

Well, I miss the windy city so I ate it up like In n Out Burger!

I'll be back in town next month...looking forward to it.

I happen to like Chicago a lot. Especially the downtown area. But TDK barely hid the fact that Gotham was actually Chicago. They managed to do this in BB, which was partly filmed in Chicago.

[Harmsway]

I happen to like Chicago a lot. Especially the downtown area. But TDK barely hid the fact that Gotham was actually Chicago. They managed to do this in BB, which was partly filmed in Chicago.

Sure, but the Gotham of BEGINS also looked and felt rather artificial.

[Judo chop]

More an observation than a complaint. Do you think the next Batman, if there is one, will move the hero back to the Wayne Manor? I suppose that would make sense considering Batman's new 'image' to the people of Gotham.

Yes. I'm pretty sure, at any rate, given Alfred's comments about looking forward to Wayne Manor being restored and seeing the cave again.

And we'd probably see the Narrows (or Arkham, rather, since the whole island is just the institution at this point), as inmates come flooding in to Arkham.

The whole island becomes an institution (with wardens and doctors and some sense of organization, etc...) or a just a place to isolate the crazies, allowing them to do what they will (ie. develop their own organization)?

[Harmsway]

The whole island becomes an institution (with wardens and doctors and some sense of organization, etc...) or a just a place to isolate the crazies, allowing them to do what they will (ie. develop their own organization)?

An institution. Like a giant island prison.

[Judo chop]

I happen to like Chicago a lot. Especially the downtown area. But TDK barely hid the fact that Gotham was actually Chicago. They managed to do this in BB, which was partly filmed in Chicago.

Sure, but the Gotham of BEGINS also looked and felt rather artificial.

I agree, but I think the crux of the problem is that it felt too small. I didn’t think Nolan handled the ‘chaos unleashed’ aspect very well. Budget restrictions could easily have been at work, but what the end of BEGINS needed was a broader feel to the Narrows and the terror and violence that was spreading. A foggy shot here of a guy crushing another man’s head, and a foggy shot there of some 6 or 7 loonies creeping about a closed alley like something out of the video to ‘Thriller’ didn’t quite cut it. Too much 80’s (ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK, RUNNING MAN, etc…) to it.

And I still prefer BB’s color scheme with that eerie orangey glow and deep, deep contrasts to the raw visuals of Gotham in TDK that head into late-Bourne territory (where Two-Face really looks out of place).

I think a little artificial works for Batman. Again, somewhere in between BB and TDK would have suited me just fine.

[Harmsway]

I agree, but I think the crux of the problem is that it felt too small. I didn’t think Nolan handled the ‘chaos unleashed’ aspect very well. Budget restrictions could easily have been at work, but what the end of BEGINS needed was a broader feel to the Narrows and the terror and violence that was spreading. A foggy shot here of a guy crushing another man’s head, and a foggy shot there of some 6 or 7 loonies creeping about a closed alley like something out of the video to ‘Thriller’ didn’t quite cut it. Too much 80’s (ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK, RUNNING MAN, etc…) to it.

Agreed.

And I still prefer BB’s color scheme with that eerie orangey glow and deep, deep contrasts to the raw visuals of Gotham in TDK that head into late-Bourne territory (where Two-Face really looks out of place).

Bourne territory? I don't see it much at all. I do see Michael Mann, though, ala COLLATERAL.

[Judo chop]

And I still prefer BB’s color scheme with that eerie orangey glow and deep, deep contrasts to the raw visuals of Gotham in TDK that head into late-Bourne territory (where Two-Face really looks out of place).

Bourne territory? I don't see it much at all. I do see Michael Mann, though, ala COLLATERAL.

I was thinking Bourne minus shakey-cam*, but you're right, COLLATERAL works better, especially at night when TDK's colors do 'richen' a bit.

*(where does Loomis get those wonderful little copyright symbols!? )

[Double-Oh-Zero]

And I still prefer BB’s color scheme with that eerie orangey glow and deep, deep contrasts to the raw visuals of Gotham in TDK that head into late-Bourne territory (where Two-Face really looks out of place).

Bourne territory? I don't see it much at all. I do see Michael Mann, though, ala COLLATERAL.

I was thinking Bourne minus shakey-cam*, but you're right, COLLATERAL works better, especially at night when TDK's colors do 'richen' a bit.

*(where does Loomis get those wonderful little copyright symbols!? )

Really? I was seeing a whole lot of Heat when I was watching TDK. Not sure if it's because Nolan commented about Mann's crime epic being an influence stylistically and visually before TDK came out, but the overall look of the film seemed to be more on par with the grand, epic, gray and blue hues of Heat as opposed to the tight, dark, and sometimes gritty look of Collateral. Just me two cents.

And to answer your question, © is achieved by ( c ) without the spaces.

[DaveBond21]

Well it opens all the way throughout England on thursday, Darlington is just the place I'm going to see it at.

That's where I saw Tomorrow Never Dies.

[danslittlefinger]

http://www.dailymail...nal-stress.html


Bale released and cites marriage difficulties and stress over Ledger's death as reason for the "assault".

Ok.

[Bondian]

The boys want to go at the weekend so I suppose I will have to go with them. It does sound quite good but I'm not sure I will stay awake - am getting old and it is probably going to be noisy.

Why not go and see it keeping a close hand on your hotdog, ya old banger.

May go and see it sometime. Alex is in no hurry. Probably because we've booked to see 'Lazy Town' at our local theatre.

Jim. Mind if I borrowed your hotdog, mate.

Going to be an expensive 7 weeks seeing that school's out. Hope Alex wins something soon. lol

Cheers,


Ian

[Andrew]

http://www.dailymail...nal-stress.html


Bale released and cites marriage difficulties and stress over Ledger's death as reason for the "assault".

Ok.

Reading the rest of the article, that's not a very accurate description of the events. It says he was depressed by the difficulties in his marriage and Ledger's death but that was not exactly the reason of the attack. He has a rocky relationship with his mother and she seemed to say some ridiculous things according to the article and he was trapped in the situation and he began to swear at her. Apparently the family didn't even call the police, someone else did.

I'm curious as to whether you read the article past the headline.

[hcmv007]

To summarize my review of Dark Knight, I will quote Donald Sutherland from the excellent movie Animal House:


"It's a piece of ."




Look, while this was somewhat entertaining, this was not at all as impressive as Batman Begins. While I liked the references to the Killing Joke, the writers dropped the ball badly. Ledger's Joker was not accurate to the comics (as far as looks go), but was entertaining, except for him doing a lizard/snake imitation throughout the film (Was I the only one who saw this?). To me, they tried to make Batman more like Spider Man, which I think is wrong for Batman. Oh, and the new Batcave is at Wayne Enterprises, and Lucius Fox knows Bruce is Batman?! Harvey Dent was badly misused and the opportunity for Two Face in the next film is wasted. Back to the Joker, where was the lethal laughing gas? I guess since Scarecrow was in the last one, and briefly here they wanted to go somewhere different. Perhaps a final transformation to the real Joker would have been more appreciated. Nope, all we got was a live interpretation of the Joker from the WB The Batman cartoon. Hence the above quote.

[sharpshooter]

Ledger's Joker was not accurate to the comics (as far as looks go)

In my opinion, it is about variety. Just like they’ve had him as a gangster (and the killer of Batman's parents) and failed comedian. Here, he comes out of nowhere and we don’t know who he is. His face is smeared with white makeup, hair dyed green, and his smile is cut. Joker trademarks but done differently. It is a different interpretation, but still faithful to the fundemental character. His characteristics and behaviour remain the same.

Getting the same old thing each time gets boring after a while. Sure, it is a winning formula, but still doesn't change the fact that it can get repetitive. Here, they've shaken it up and still remained faithful. It’s a little twist and I like it.

Harvey Dent was badly misused and and the opportunity for Two Face in the next film is wasted.

No, I don't think it is at all. Eckhart did a fantastic job. It is bittersweet, I'd like him to return, but the way it is handled in The Dark Knight is too good to tamper with in my view.

Back to the Joker, where was the lethal laughing gas?

For this version, you would not arm him with those sort of items. Ledger is a Joker for our times, realised in Nolan's realistic setting. He prefers the use of knives, taking on any situation armed only with a knife is very much in line with The Joker's fearless attitude. When waved around by Ledger, it's as terrifying as any other weapon.

[Loomis]

Not to dispute Hildebrand's claims that the action is messy and hard to follow - I'm sure there's a bit of that in there, indeed more than a bit (I found the action in BATMAN BEGINS either incomprehensible or dull or both). But I'll tell ya: the chase clips of TDK that I saw look amazing.... and shot very nicely and stylishly (but not ostentatiously so).

Wait a minute! I did not say the whole movie was messy. I said the bat-mobile, bat-cycle/pod sequence was a bit muddled.

I know that you did not say the whole movie was messy. That's why I referred to your "claims that the action is messy and hard to follow", which would seem to chime with your comment that "the bat-mobile, bat-cycle/pod sequence was a bit muddled". How am I misrepresenting your views? I know that you liked THE DARK KNIGHT as a whole.

[HildebrandRarity]

Not to dispute Hildebrand's claims that the action is messy and hard to follow - I'm sure there's a bit of that in there, indeed more than a bit (I found the action in BATMAN BEGINS either incomprehensible or dull or both). But I'll tell ya: the chase clips of TDK that I saw look amazing.... and shot very nicely and stylishly (but not ostentatiously so).

Wait a minute! I did not say the whole movie was messy. I said the bat-mobile, bat-cycle/pod sequence was a bit muddled.

I know that you did not say the whole movie was messy. That's why I referred to your "claims that the action is messy and hard to follow", which would seem to chime with your comment that "the bat-mobile, bat-cycle/pod sequence was a bit muddled". How am I misrepresenting your views? I know that you liked THE DARK KNIGHT as a whole.

Yes I liked it (8.5 / 10 so far) but when so many laud it as one of the greats of all time, I have to take issue. My view is that it's one of the best action/adventure movies of the 00s...but that's it. I think that of Gladiator, The Bourne Identity and Casino Royale as well.

Another thing is that if someone comes here on these forums suggesting it's the greatest, then they better be able to handle the heat of scrutiny because CBn-ers are used to putting each and every James Bond film under a significant degree of critical analysis. In this vein, I can safely say that, as a mere comparison (if such things are even possible inspite of the similarities in 'genre'), Casino Royale is a superior film. In fact it may not even be close once i've given The Dark Knight another viewing or two.

Sure there's a lot going for it: A thumping score, Ledger as The Joker, The Dent/Harvey Two Face story arc (the tragedy of The Dark Knight), some cool action scenes, above par ensemble acting, and (i imagine) a sincere desire to create an extraordinary piece of cinema, just to name a handful of positives.

The other side of the coin is some gaffs/flaws in logic, too-silhouetted/muddled an action/chase sequence involving Joker, Dent and the Batmobile & Bat-Pod/Cycle (set in very dark environs which 'cheats' a viewer such as myself), a morality tale involving the ferries-at-midnight finale' that is very cliched and lazily written and executed (indeed, it's a sequence which would generate rolling eyes and groans for the more discerning and critical James Bond fan) and, finally, Batman actually playing third fiddle in his own movie (an aspect of which James Bond fans would be screeming for Eon's blood!).

Does that help?

[Loomis]

Does that help?

Yes, although I only skimmed that last paragraph in order to avoid any spoilers.

I'm seeing THE DARK KNIGHT tomorrow. All I want is for it to be an entertaining and occasionally highly impressive experience that kicks the outta BATMAN BEGINS, a film I've never particularly liked. And I don't think I'll be disappointed.

I'm not going to go into it determined that it should be either better or worse than CASINO ROYALE. I'm not going to be thinking about Bond at all. I've no agenda with THE DARK KNIGHT - I'm not and will never be a Batman fan (regardless of how much I end up liking TDK). I'm totally neutral on this one.

That said, I do have a very good feeling about THE DARK KNIGHT and will certainly be disappointed if it doesn't impress and entertain me in the way I think/hope it will. But I don't have any kind of axe to grind about it.