2081 replies to this topic

[BoogieBond]

At Least we will probably see Lucius back in the next one. I was a bit concerned when he threatened resignation. But on typing his name at the end, seeing the machine that was his bane exploding, I took that to mean, he'll be back, as Batman's Q.

[dodge]

Aha, thank you! I'd forgotten about this--and how this part bugged me. I know, I know, here come the "You must be joking, right?" posts...but does anyone remember the villain in No Country for Old Men doing the precise same thing? I wonder if Aaron Eckhart imitated Javier Barden's workout routine... Coincidence? If you like. But it bugged me the same way if I read the same words or scene in one book that I'd just read in another.

Sure, but the character of Two-Face has been around a lot longer than Anton Chigurh, and the coin has always been part of his character. I think if anybody's stealing from anybody, NO COUNTRY is stealing from Batman.

Thank you, I was just going to post that.

I can't believe that some think that NCfOM created the idea of a coin flip determining someone's fate when that's what Two Face has been doing since the 1940's.

The other night I had the misfortune to watch Ban Gazarra flip a coin in Road House to determine who he'd kill. Coins may have been tossed long before the 40s when, as many seem to feel, Two Face coopted the gesture. The point I was making had nothing to do with BM ripping NCFOM off. My point was, and it remains, that NCFOM took the coin gesture and used it so well that I felt let down when the gesture resurfaced in TDK. As a creative team, the Nolans could have trumped NCFOM and reclaimed the gesture as their own with just a little effort. I felt they missed the boat. One man's opinion.

[dodge]

The coin flip was far more integral to Two Face than it was to Anton.

Agreed. Philosophically, it carries about the same weight in each film. But it certainly means more to the character of Harvey Dent than it does to Anton. With Harvey Dent, it's integrally related to who he is. With Anton, it's more of a, "Oh, that's cool" moment.
In truth, Anton Chigurh isn't much of a character. He's an effective scary dude, but beyond that, he's got nothing to bring to the table beyond an awful haircut and a monotone voice.

I love the comment but think you have it backwards. I'd say the Academy agrees with me on this one, judging from the Oscar awarded the actor who brought nothing to the table... The intriguing thing about Anton to me, as opposed to Harvey--who starts off as a human and ends as a cartoon--is that he actually hopes, partly, that his victims will call the toss right. And that he really does respect those who face their arbitrary ends with dignity and class.

[dodge]

But, even if Two-Face got there first, Anton Chigurh is the one many, many viewers are likely to remember--and possibly even believe--naughty Dodge!--that Chigurh did it first.

Maybe, maybe not. You're the first I've seen even suggest a thing, dodge. And Chigurh didn't do it first. Two-Face did, in the rather successful (and rather awful) BATMAN FOREVER.

My argument is this, then: the BM creative team should have taken this into account. A single line of dialogue--even very subtle--indicating that they were aware of 'the new discoverer'--and letting us no that BM got there first.

Why bother? It's really a non-issue. Indeed, you're the only person I've seen suggest it. And I think most folks are able to recognize that Batman lore is rooted in a very long history indeed, and was there long before Cormac McCarthy's novel or the following film.

Heck, 80% of the folks seeing THE DARK KNIGHT probably didn't even see NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN, anyway.

Harms, I can only say that I hope you're not suggesting that my being the only person to suggest something here is proof that I am wrong. I've been either first, or among the first, on site a fair number of times. There are risks in doing that, I'll be the first to admit. But when I'm wrong I'm also among the first to admit it. Every now and then, at least, I manage to be right.

I was the first to predict IM's $300 million domestic take, on site.
I was the first to predict TDK's $400 million domestic take, on site.
I was among Dan Craig's strongest champions here when he was awarded the role.

Grant me the same tolerance you always have in the past--and don't disregard my opinions simply because they're 'just' mine.

Cheers.

[Judo chop]

The coin flip was far more integral to Two Face than it was to Anton.

Agreed. Philosophically, it carries about the same weight in each film. But it certainly means more to the character of Harvey Dent than it does to Anton. With Harvey Dent, it's integrally related to who he is. With Anton, it's more of a, "Oh, that's cool" moment.
In truth, Anton Chigurh isn't much of a character. He's an effective scary dude, but beyond that, he's got nothing to bring to the table beyond an awful haircut and a monotone voice.

I love the comment but think you have it backwards. I'd say the Academy agrees with me on this one, judging from the Oscar awarded the actor who brought nothing to the table... The intriguing thing about Anton to me, as opposed to Harvey--who starts off as a human and ends as a cartoon--is that he actually hopes, partly, that his victims will call the toss right. And that he really does respect those who face their arbitrary ends with dignity and class.

Yeah. Having seen each film only once, I think I’ll lean in dodge’s direction. Anton is not a deep character – he may be more symbolic than anything ‘real’ - but I think the Cohens are able make more out of less with his coin flipping ‘I’m pitting you against pure chance’ philosophy. Dent has so much more potential as a character, but, as dodge said, Nolan allows him to become a little cartoonish in his transformation.

But… (and it’s a big one)… I really want to see TDK again to be sure. I don’t really care to see NO COUNTRY again.

[Mister Asterix]

When he refuses to join the League of Shadows. When he decides he won't kill, when he decides that it's not about his own anger, that it's about helping others. That's what that whole scene is about, and all the subsequent dialogue. It's not like Nolan was particularly subtle about that whole aspect of the story (as you know, the script has all the thematic subtlety of a sledgehammer).

Off topic a bit, but can someone explain this: In Begins, Wayne states he won’t kill the man that the League of Shadows wants him to kill because he won’t take a life. He then immediately blows up the building killing everyone inside except himself and Liam’s character, including the man he refused to kill.

Huh?

[Righty007]

When he refuses to join the League of Shadows. When he decides he won't kill, when he decides that it's not about his own anger, that it's about helping others. That's what that whole scene is about, and all the subsequent dialogue. It's not like Nolan was particularly subtle about that whole aspect of the story (as you know, the script has all the thematic subtlety of a sledgehammer).

Off topic a bit, but can someone explain this: In Begins, Wayne states he won’t kill the man that the League of Shadows wants him to kill because he won’t take a life. He then immediately blows up the building killing everyone inside except himself and Liam’s character, including the man he refused to kill.

Huh?

He didn't kill them (directly), he just chose not to "save" them.

[Mister Asterix]

He didn't kill them (directly), he just chose not to "save" them.

That of course is . If I blow up an aeroplane and 347 people die, did I just choose not to save them? No, I killed them, just as Wayne killed everyone in that building. Wayne caused the explosion; the blood is on his hands.

[Righty007]

He didn't kill them (directly), he just chose not to "save" them.

That of course is . If I blow up an aeroplane and 347 people die, did I just choose not to save them? No, I killed them, just as Wayne killed everyone in that building. Wayne caused the explosion; the blood is on his hands.

Wayne was forced into a situation where he had to choose between setting an occupied ninja shack on fire and his life. He made the right choice.

Setting the place on fire allowed everybody ample time to evacuate the building. Your analogy doesn't give anybody a chance to survive.

[Loomis]

You see, the whole problem I have with the idea of Wayne as a selfless do-gooder is that the saga takes great pains to "explain" how violent childhood trauma changed his life and set him upon his present path. And if that isn't a path of revenge I don't know what a path of revenge is.

I don't see how that follows. Childhood trauma results in a life path, and therefore that life path, by necessity, is revenge?

Well, in this case, yes.

Bruce Wayne takes the hurt and anger resulting from his tragedy and funnels it into a higher purpose, something about genuinely improving the world he knew. How can that be vengeance when its ultimate guiding purpose is about helping others?

Because it's a crusade given birth to by his desire for revenge against Joe Chill, which he carried with him for many years and nurtured to the point where he was ready to murder Chill at his parole hearing.

Really, though, I think it would be more accurate to say that, come the events of TDK, Wayne is motivated by both a desire for revenge (although he may well wish to deny this, even to himself) and a nobler desire to improve the world.

I prefer to think of Wayne/Batman as a mixture of good and not-so-good. How else to explain his occasional recklessness and selfishness?

[Judo chop]

Really, though, I think it would be more accurate to say that, come the events of TDK, Wayne is motivated by both a desire for revenge (although he may well wish to deny this, even to himself) and a nobler desire to improve the world.

I prefer to think of Wayne/Batman as a mixture of good and not-so-good. How else to explain his occasional recklessness and selfishness?

As he said in BEGINS, 'revenge' doesn't do him any good. The man who killed his parents, and even the man who drove the man to kill his parents, are dead. His sense of revenge drove him to Raz al Ghul, who, ironically, helped him deal with that anger and turned him onto a different path - the path his father left to him - the path to saving Gotham.

Why do you say he cannot ever come to grips with that? Why must the revenge remain? Personally, as a matter of good character writing, I think it should still remain in TDK and we should see Wayne progressing to put it aside. But I don't see why it must always be about revenge.

[Mister Asterix]

Wayne was forced into a situation where he had to choose between setting an occupied ninja shack on fire and his life. He made the right choice.

Setting the place on fire allowed everybody ample time to evacuate the building. Your analogy doesn't give anybody a chance to survive.

If it gave everyone ample time to escape then why would Wayne have assumed that Ra’s died?

[Judo chop]

Wayne was forced into a situation where he had to choose between setting an occupied ninja shack on fire and his life. He made the right choice.

Setting the place on fire allowed everybody ample time to evacuate the building. Your analogy doesn't give anybody a chance to survive.

If it gave everyone ample time to escape then why would Wayne have assumed that Ra’s died?

I think what he means is that everyone else had time to escape. Raz (the fake one) could have fled as well, but chose to fight Wayne. Upon doing so, he forfeited his chance for mercy and Wayne had no choice but to fight back, fair and square.

[Harmsway]

If it gave everyone ample time to escape then why would Wayne have assumed that Ra’s died?

Because he watched Wantanabe's Ra's bite the dust right in front of him when the room caved in on him (hence Wayne's line, "I watched him die...").

Anyway, I finally saw this movie in IMAX. Quite fun. The added picture size and quality, plus the wonderful sound, were excellent. I hope we see a whole film in IMAX one day.

[DR76]

Considering that the story featured the darker side of the hero's personality and ended in the death of a major character . . . yeah, it was dark. I'm not laughing.

The audience when I saw it was.

At least the three movies were spared the ridiculously contrived ending that nearly ruined THE DARK KNIGHT for me.

They more than made up with it with their fair share of contrivance elsewhere.

Hmmmm . . . I guess I can't say the same.

[Loomis]

Really, though, I think it would be more accurate to say that, come the events of TDK, Wayne is motivated by both a desire for revenge (although he may well wish to deny this, even to himself) and a nobler desire to improve the world.

I prefer to think of Wayne/Batman as a mixture of good and not-so-good. How else to explain his occasional recklessness and selfishness?

As he said in BEGINS, 'revenge' doesn't do him any good. The man who killed his parents, and even the man who drove the man to kill his parents, are dead. His sense of revenge drove him to Raz al Ghul, who, ironically, helped him deal with that anger and turned him onto a different path - the path his father left to him - the path to saving Gotham.

Why do you say he cannot ever come to grips with that? Why must the revenge remain? Personally, as a matter of good character writing, I think it should still remain in TDK and we should see Wayne progressing to put it aside. But I don't see why it must always be about revenge.

But Thomas Wayne's path to saving Gotham was one of philanthropy - hospital-building and so forth. Why doesn't Bruce content himself with suchlike? As he himself says in BB, a man who dresses up as a bat must have issues.

On the other hand, perhaps I'm projecting on these films things that simply aren't there, purely in order to satisfy my own thirst for a very flawed, very dark Batman who's Blinded By Inconsolable Rage™.

Anyway, I finally saw this movie in IMAX.

So what happens? Does the screen suddenly go huge and then just as suddenly shrink down again? Which bits of the film are in IMAX? How many minutes of screentime, roughly?

[Harmsway]

But Thomas Wayne's path to saving Gotham was one of philanthropy - hospital-building and so forth. Why doesn't Bruce content himself with suchlike?

Because, as they explained in BEGINS, it was ineffective.

On the other hand, perhaps I'm projecting on these films things that simply aren't there, purely in order to satisfy my own thirst for a very flawed, very dark Batman who's Blinded By Inconsolable Rage™.

It's worth considering.

I do think the Batman in BEGINS and DARK KNIGHT is a flawed guy, but I don't think he's quite as flawed as you want to make him out to be.

Anyway, I finally saw this movie in IMAX.

So what happens? Does the screen suddenly go huge and then just as suddenly shrink down again?

Yeah. But I stopped noticing after a while. Even the "normal" sections are still rather big and a significant improvement on the traditional theatrical experience.

Which bits of the film are in IMAX?

Mostly the action moments and city vistas (but not all of them). To be honest, I was rather confused... some random shots would be in IMAX, and other times sequences I expected to be IMAX sequences weren't. I remember that the big vehicular chase was entirely IMAX, though.

How many minutes of screentime, roughly?

Well, 20-30 minutes, maybe? As I said, I stopped noticing after a while, so I don't really know.

[Loomis]

Even the "normal" sections are still rather big and a significant improvement on the traditional theatrical experience.

Really? I hadn't considered that. Cool.

Which bits of the film are in IMAX?

Mostly the action moments and city vistas (but not all of them). To be honest, I was rather confused... some random shots would be in IMAX, and other times sequences I expected to be IMAX sequences weren't.

Interesting. Seems a bit odd. Presumably there was a lot of careful planning behind all this on the part of Nolan and co., though (unless they just used the IMAX cameras at random or certain planned uses of the format ended up not working out),

How many minutes of screentime, roughly?

Well, 20-30 minutes, maybe?

Sounds pretty good value for money, and if the film as a whole looks (and sounds) better then I guess that clinches the deal. I can't wait to see THE DARK KNIGHT: THE IMAX EXPERIENCE (although it seems that tickets are like gold dust over here).

[Harmsway]

Which bits of the film are in IMAX?

Mostly the action moments and city vistas (but not all of them). To be honest, I was rather confused... some random shots would be in IMAX, and other times sequences I expected to be IMAX sequences weren't.

Interesting. Seems a bit odd. Presumably there was a lot of careful planning behind all this on the part of Nolan and co., though (unless they just used the IMAX cameras at random or certain planned uses of the format ended up not working out).

It was odd, and some of it didn't seem very planned. Some of it was downright bizarre (there's one shot where Freeman walks into Lau's building that's in IMAX, while none of the other shots in the sequences before and after are). But that said, I'll take every IMAX shot I can get, because the picture quality is stunning.

Sounds pretty good value for money, and if the film as a whole looks (and sounds) better then I guess that clinches the deal.

The sound was a bigger deal for me than the visuals, to be honest. The sound was phenomenal.

[Single-O-Seven]

Thanks, Harmsway. I'm dying to go check it out in Imax now. Most movies are a waste when shown on Imax screens, because other than, perhaps, better sound quality, the picture format is not Imax-intended, and adds up to wasted screen space (and wasted extra dollars paying for an Imax ticket). With TDK partially filmed for Imax, the experience should be quite rewarding.

[Loomis]

A very interesting (and very positive) review of THE DARK KNIGHT:

http://www.spiked-on...te/article/5534

Handily enough, you can watch the trailer on the same page, and watching it right after reading the review is a striking and genuinely unnerving experience. Try it.

[Mister Asterix]

If it gave everyone ample time to escape then why would Wayne have assumed that Ra’s died?

Because he watched Wantanabe's Ra's bite the dust right in front of him when the room caved in on him (hence Wayne's line, "I watched him die...").

Anyway, I finally saw this movie in IMAX. Quite fun. The added picture size and quality, plus the wonderful sound, were excellent. I hope we see a whole film in IMAX one day.

You know I’m thinking the version I watched on television the other day was edited in that scene. Because none of this bothered me before that viewing.

[ImTheMoneypenny]

If it gave everyone ample time to escape then why would Wayne have assumed that Ra’s died?

Because he watched Wantanabe's Ra's bite the dust right in front of him when the room caved in on him (hence Wayne's line, "I watched him die...").

Anyway, I finally saw this movie in IMAX. Quite fun. The added picture size and quality, plus the wonderful sound, were excellent. I hope we see a whole film in IMAX one day.

You know I’m thinking the version I watched on television the other day was edited in that scene. Because none of this bothered me before that viewing.

I hate television edited films, as sometimes their choice of cuts is mind boggling or they slice it up just so they can put more time in for commercials. I saw an edited version of A History Of Violence that was absolutely butchered for a cable channel.

Okay now I'll get back on topic, I see a lot of people talking about the IMAX TDK. There were some who won't go see it in the regular theatre because they're booked to see it in IMAX and won't see it any other way.

There's no IMAX here, perhaps in Indianapolis, but that's an hour + away from where I live.

[[dark]]

Anyway, I finally saw this movie in IMAX.

So what happens? Does the screen suddenly go huge and then just as suddenly shrink down again?

Yeah. But I stopped noticing after a while. Even the "normal" sections are still rather big and a significant improvement on the traditional theatrical experience.

Which bits of the film are in IMAX?

Mostly the action moments and city vistas (but not all of them). To be honest, I was rather confused... some random shots would be in IMAX, and other times sequences I expected to be IMAX sequences weren't. I remember that the big vehicular chase was entirely IMAX, though.

How many minutes of screentime, roughly?

Well, 20-30 minutes, maybe? As I said, I stopped noticing after a while, so I don't really know.

Thanks for the heads-up about the IMAX stuff, Harmsway.

I've read a lot about The Dark Knight in IMAX but nothing beyond it being brilliant. It's nice to have some specifics. I'm so excited to check The Dark Knight out a second time on IMAX. Hope it'll be a totally different experience to seeing it in a regular cinema as I did the first time.

[Loomis]

Just as a little trivia note, I know that there were IMAX (or, since they weren't actually shot in that format, I guess I should say "IMAX") screenings in London of BATMAN BEGINS and CASINO ROYALE (don't know about any other films). I regret not seeing CR.

[[dark]]

Just as a little trivia note, I know that there were IMAX (or, since they weren't actually shot in that format, I guess I should say "IMAX") screenings in London of BATMAN BEGINS and CASINO ROYALE (don't know about any other films). I regret not seeing CR.

Wait, Casino Royale? There is no way I could have possibly missed that! ...is there?

[Loomis]

Dude, it happened. Don't know exactly when, but.... well, I'm fairly certain it happened. I seem to recall ACE saying he went. Waterloo, it would have been. I mean, I may be wrong, but.... I don't think so.

[Harmsway]

A very interesting (and very positive) review of THE DARK KNIGHT:

http://www.spiked-on...te/article/5534

Handily enough, you can watch the trailer on the same page, and watching it right after reading the review is a striking and genuinely unnerving experience. Try it.

Good review.

[[dark]]

Dude, it happened. Don't know exactly when, but.... well, I'm fairly certain it happened. I seem to recall ACE saying he went. Waterloo, it would have been. I mean, I may be wrong, but.... I don't think so.

I know we went to the premiere, but still, I wish I'd known about this!

All I remember were seeing two grinning penguins (Happy Feet) adorning the outside of that IMAX every day. Sweet enough to give me diabetes!

[Loomis]

I know we went to the premiere, but still, I wish I'd known about this!

Yeah, and what a helluva night that premiere was. Good times.