2081 replies to this topic

[Loomis]

I've seen PEARL HARBOR just once, on video, in 2002, when I was 27. TITANIC I saw once on the big screen and once on video - haven't sat through it fully since '98, I guess, although I've seen bits and pieces on TV.

[Judo chop]

According to Yahoo, fans' biggest gripe with THE DARK KNIGHT falls under "none of the above" on my list.

Yahoo link

[HildebrandRarity]

According to Yahoo, fans' biggest gripe with THE DARK KNIGHT falls under "none of the above" on my list.

Yahoo link

It's small potatoes which can easily be adjusted on DVD if they ever choose to do so.

Yes, The Dark Knight has some 'deeper' flaws but this movie will always remain special given the special situation(s) surrounding it.

[dodge]

I say it'll top The Titanic.

Well, it's almost guaranteed to take the #2 spot on the unadjusted domestic list away from A New Hope, but I can't see it getting the $600 million needed to topple Titanic.

As always, I respect you. My prediction is a risky one. But sooner or later something has to topple the dreadful, appalling chick flick known as The Titanic. The only way TDK can do that is through the strength of repeat viewers--and one source states that the females who saw TT over and over and over again are now being replaced by males who see the film repeatedly on both regular screens and IMAX.

If I'm proven wrong, no disgrace. But I won't go down without a fight--I'm seeing TDK IMAX tomorrow!

[Loomis]

But sooner or later something has to topple the dreadful, appalling chick flick known as The Titanic. The only way TDK can do that is through the strength of repeat viewers--and one source states that the females who saw TT over and over and over again are now being replaced by males who see the film repeatedly on both regular screens and IMAX.

Ah, yes, the battle of the sexes. When TITANIC was in cinemas, my ex was obsessed with it, as was her mother. They made numerous trips to see it on the big screen, behaving like me with ROCKY BALBOA. And they wouldn't brook even the slightest criticism of the film, direct or implied. My ex flew into a massive rage with me when I tried to convince her that there wouldn't be a sequel to it, whereas she was absolutely unshakeable in her belief that there would be a TITANIC 2 ("Don't be stupid, it's the biggest hit of all time, so of course they'll do another one!"). In those days, though, you just couldn't reason with women when it came to matters DiCaprio.

As for THE DARK KNIGHT, almost all the female reaction to it that I've come across (online and in Real Life™) has been negative. Definitely a male movie. I guess us guys are being drawn in not just by the action but by the three competing visions of masculinity (Wayne/Batman, The Joker and Dent/Two-Face) that are at the centre of the film.

[Andrew]

That's interesting. I know plenty of females who enjoyed the film.

[Mister Asterix]

As for THE DARK KNIGHT, almost all the female reaction to it that I've come across (online and in Real Life™) has been negative. Definitely a male movie. I guess us guys are being drawn in not just by the action but by the three competing visions of masculinity (Wayne/Batman, The Joker and Dent/Two-Face) that are at the centre of the film.

Interesting. All I know is that my wife and daughter both liked The Dark Knight more than I did.

[Professor Dent]

TITANIC lost it's lustre for me similarly once I purchased it on it's video release 10 years. The flaws the critics were carping about were alot more noticeable (the cardboard characters and script). Still I wouldn't go so far as to say PEARL HARBOUR was any better .

I think this happens with certain movies. When you see it in an auditorium with a lot of other people, you get that group dynamic going that is infectious at times. Once you get the movie home, you have control of the remote & can then start picking the movie apart as you watch it over & over again. Also, by this time, you've read a ton of stuff on the internet so your are more hyper-sensitive to "errors" other people found. Not a bad thing, just the way it is. Titanic was definitely one of those group movies. I still like it but not as much as I did when I saw it in the theater. TDK is awesome on the big screen & a great group movie. I guess we'll see how that translates to the home once we get the DVD.

[00Twelve]

Loomis, I'm happy to report that my wife defies your assessment regarding women and TDK. She liked it quite a bit!

[HildebrandRarity]

Loomie has been hanging around some wierd women, it would seem

My lady actually tagged along happily for a second viewing...A RARE occurence!

Loomie, old bud, you need a change of scene. If you imagine The Joker competing for your "vision of masculinity", well, things must be getting a bit pear-shaped in the Real World ™.

Perhaps Zorin or Dee-Bee can help re-position you in the right direction?

[Loomis]

Steady on.

Was merely trying to gauge why THE DARK KNIGHT has been so stupidly successful, to the point where people are in all seriousness asking whether it'll outgross TITANIC.

I mean, we all knew that TDK was going to be a massive hit, but this.... it's just ridiculous how much loot it's raking in.

If this were happening with QUANTUM OF SOLACE we'd all be struggling to breathe.

Now, if something makes money on the scale of this new Batman flick, it's usually because it's for some reason or reasons managed to catch the popular mood, connecting with people in an unusually deep way. Evidently, it's not just the chases, fights and explosions that are drawing people in for repeat viewings - there must be something else going on for TDK to be a smash of the magnitude that it is. It must be tickling the world's psyche in some fashion beyond the obvious.

Ergo, I was idly stirring the waters of speculation as to what TDK's hidden X-factor may be. Are young men of the early 21st century finding that the triumvirate of Wayne/Dent/Joker holds up some kind of mirror to them? Does TDK reflect our feelings in this post-9/11 world? Am I talking bollocks? Yes, but it's still a fair question: why has THE DARK KNIGHT become - arguably - the first popcorn franchise blockbuster of the 00s to achieve the status of a genuine phenomenon? How come it's done so frickin' well?

[Cruiserweight]

How can any women not find Heath as the Joker sexy is beyond me.

[freemo]

My ex flew into a massive rage with me when I tried to convince her that there wouldn't be a sequel to it, whereas she was absolutely unshakeable in her belief that there would be a TITANIC 2 ("Don't be stupid, it's the biggest hit of all time, so of course they'll do another one!").

SON OF TITANIC?

[HildebrandRarity]

there must be something else going on for TDK to be a smash of the magnitude that it is. It must be tickling the world's psyche in some fashion beyond the obvious.

Ergo, I was idly stirring the waters of speculation as to what TDK's hidden X-factor may be. Are young men of the early 21st century finding that the triumvirate of Wayne/Dent/Joker holds up some kind of mirror to them? Does TDK reflect our feelings in this post-9/11 world? Am I talking bollocks? Yes, but it's still a fair question: why has THE DARK KNIGHT become - arguably - the first popcorn franchise blockbuster of the 00s to achieve the status of a genuine phenomenon? How come it's done so frickin' well?

It has something to do with the fact that for the first time since the Lees, a popular and handsome young actor has tragically died after pouring everything into an iconic role, into a charachter that's been around for most peoples lives.

The story and the circumstances lends itself to people looking at mortality and morality during dark times.

There's a meloncholy to be shared by the multitudes...and a shortened life to to be celebrated and applauded.

This movie does that for the masses.

[danslittlefinger]

http://www.dailymail...ensors-but.html

Analysis: Unaccountable, unashamed, the scandal of the faceless film censors who do anything but

By Richard Pendlebury
Last updated at 1:52 AM on 06th August 2008

What doesn't kill you makes you stranger,' leers a grotesquely face-painted Heath Ledger as he leans in to camera to pull the pin of a hand grenade stuffed into the mouth of a badly wounded bank manager.

It is the late actor's first line in The Dark Knight, the new Batman blockbuster, and comes six minutes into the film.

By then, half a dozen people have already been murdered, mostly by ear-splitting gun shots to the back, although one is pulverised by a bus.

No joke: The violence in The Dark Knight is too terrifying for children to watch

Another male bank employee is beaten and humiliated, while a hyper-ventilating female colleague has a gun shoved in her face by terrifyingly masked men.

Most critics agree that the opening sequence and much of the rest of the 153-minute long movie is a tour de force of brooding menace and convincing, if 'relentless', psychopathic violence amid a haunted cityscape of washed-out colours.

What has divided even the film's admirers is the extraordinary decision by the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) to grant it a 12A certificate.

You may also be astonished by the board's arrogant reaction to the furore.
'The Dark Knight is a great film, but the violence was too much for my daughter', reveals Iain Duncan Smith

To put it starkly, the classification means unaccompanied children as young as 12 (or younger, if with an adult) can be 'entertained' by Ledger's Joker waxing lyrical on his preference for murder by stabbing.

There are a host of other scenes in which such theory is put into practice, including one in which a man has his eyeball stabbed with a pencil.

Since it opened in the UK a little more than a week ago, The Dark Knight has proved a box-office smash.

Some 4.7 million people have seen it, paying £25 million. Thanks to the BBFC classification a good number of those will have been under-12s, taken by a parent who had been reassured by the BBFC's assessment.

I saw The Dark Knight yesterday lunchtime. It is an entertaining film, if overlong.

But by no stretch of the imagination is it a film for children.

And amid the widespread concern over rising youth violence and the proliferation of knife murder, the BBFC decision seems even more misguided and irresponsible.

Last week, Mail columnist Allison Pearson triggered the debate on this violent film, saying she was appalled that children could see it.

Yesterday, former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith penned an open letter condemning the BBFC after taking his 15-year-old daughter to see The Dark Knight, which he confessed he enjoyed.

'I was astonished that the BBFC could have seen fit to allow anyone under the age of 15 to watch the film,' he said.

Others have called for the movie to be reclassified or recut. Given the numbers who have already seen it in the UK, that would be a little akin to shutting the stable door after the bolted horse.

Certainly a reclassification to certificate 15 would have cost the film-maker Warner Brothers and its distributors millions of pounds in lost revenue.

The financial incentives to test the limits of a film category or persuade the BBFC to widen the potential audience are huge.

The alternative, as happened with the recent 12A-rated James Bond film Casino Royale, is to have a contentious scene left on the cutting room floor (which even then saw scores of complaints about the BBFC's lenience).

No such cut was ordered with The Dark Knight. Warner got the rating that it had lobbied for.

The subsequent controversy has served to reignite the ongoing debate about the effect of violent films on society, media censorship and, most pertinently of all, the almost unique status of the 'too liberal' BBFC.

The 96-year-old board prides itself on being one of only two national film classification bodies in the world to be independent of central government (the other is in the United States).

It appoints its own staff and classifies films on behalf of local authorities who licence Britain's cinemas. Since 1984, it has also rated videos and more recently DVDs.

Some 17,000 works are seen by its 33 full-time 'examiners' every year and it is funded by the fee that a distributor pays each time a film is submitted for classification.

The average fee for a feature film, calculated on its running time, is around £650.

Its independence of government means it is free from possible State censorship. But it also means the BBFC is pretty much unaccountable.

The Ivory Tower, 'we know best' attitude that this can engender was all too obvious yesterday.

'We watch everything from Teletubbies box sets to hardcore pørnography,' its chief spokesperson told me, dismissing The Dark Knight criticism out of hand.

'There's nobody in this country who knows more about film than we do.'

She said 'four or five' of the BBFC's examiners saw the film, armed with a checklist of the board's guidelines.

'They did what they do with every film. They took into account a number of factors, including its fantasy setting.

'In this case, it was of a comic book genre, which everyone clearly knows and understands.

'There is no bloodshed at all in this film,' she added. 'There is no emphasis on injury or stress on any effects of violence.

'The characters are clearly comic book and can do things which a human cannot.

'The examiners were all satisfied (on this basis) that it was a 12A film, and that was sanctioned by a senior management figure.

'It was not felt to be a case that needed handling by our director.'

And who is the BBFC's director, whose final word is as good as law with regard to what we can and cannot see on our cinema screens?

David Cooke got the job in 2004. His first high-profile decision was to rate as 18 the film Nine Songs, which included graphic scenes of real rather than simulated sex.

So what are his qualifications? Well, it seems he had previously worked in the Northern Ireland Office.

His only experience of working with the entertainment industry would appear to be in the Eighties, when he spent three years in the Home Office Broadcasting Department.

He describes himself as a 'regular film-goer.'How comforting.

He said on his appointment that it was 'vital for the classification process to be... fair and open; to command public confidence; and to be responsive to social concerns'.

The BBFC president Sir Quentin Thomas is another ex-Northern Ireland office mandarin. The two vice-presidents are Janet Lewis-Jones, who has a similar Home Office background, and Lord Taylor of Warwick, a lawyer and the first black Tory peer.

Senior posts are advertised in the media and the appointments are decided by the BBFC's council of management.

They seem to favour Home Office civil servants who have a reputation - some would say, notoriety - of being at the far end of liberal in their views.

What then of the 33 examiners, who earn up to £47,000 a year?

They are the men and women who make the day-to-day decisions. They have a huge impact on Britain's cultural life and its subsequent affect on wider society.

But in spite of Mr Cooke's declaration of openness, their identities remain shrouded in secrecy.

We know that they are recruited through advertisements in the media. But of their personal tastes, backgrounds and predilictions we know nothing.

Open? Independent? Politically correct? Married? Knowledgeable of children? We simply don't know.

What is certain is that they are utterly unaccountable.

So let us examine then the BBFC's defence in detail. It does not withstand much scrutiny.

The Dark Knight is, indeed, based on the Batman comics. But its cartoon origins are far less apparent than previous Batman films.

The opening bank robbery could be at home in a realistic, adult crime movie. And yet the BBFC is sure that 'everyone' understands 'the genre'.

What, even the nine-year-olds in the audience?

It is true that there is no blood; the gore of real shootings is absent. But that, if anything, sanitises the slaying.

Similarly, the repeated beatings are no less severe just because the impact is off camera. It just means they satisfy the examiner's clinical criteria.

This matters, because the filmmaker's target audience is not former Tory leaders of late middle age, but the much larger, more impressionable and above all lucrative young market - the financial aspect is key here.

The ability of these children to make moral and contextual judgments is far less developed than that of Iain Duncan Smith.

For many, knife crime is a daily threat or temptation. What they see in the cinema is not divorced from their world outside as the BBFC seems to believe.

Tory MP Julian Brazier has campaigned for the BBFC being made accountable to Parliament on just these grounds.

Earlier this year he introduced a Bill which, if passed, would have seen MPs able to have a role in making BBFC appointments, vetoing its guidelines and appealing against its classifications.

At the moment only the film industry can appeal against them, while local authorities alone have the power to over-rule them.

But as the BBFC's website states of the latter: 'This does not happen very often.'

Introducing the Bill, Mr Brazier said he believed, like many, that violence on screen is 'one of the fundamental drivers of our increasingly violent society'.

But there was no appetite among either Front Benches to see a change, on the grounds that it raised the spectre of State censorship.

In the debate in February which saw the Brazier Bill killed at its second reading, Culture Minister Margaret Hodge said of the BBFC: 'Although it does not get it right every time, it does an extremely good job in incredibly difficult circumstances.'

On this occasion it has most certainly got it wrong with what is likely to be the most watched film of 2008.

In so doing it has further damaged its credibility as a responsible, independent body.

Statistics show that the number of cuts that the BBFC has demanded of films has fallen dramatically in recent years.

Latest figures show that the BBFC has demanded a cut in only one of the 389 feature films it has viewed this year - some 0.3 per cent.

This compares with a cut rate of more than 30 per cent of films in 1974.

Does this mean that film-makers have become more responsible? Or does it suggest, as its former president Andreas Whittam Smith recently observed, that the BBFC's attitude to violence has become more relaxed since he left in 2002?

'We know when there are attempts to manipulate the system,' said the BBFC spokesperson yesterday.


'They do not work. We do not bow to pressure.'

So even though we don't know who they are, we must trust their word.

'What doesn't kill you makes you stranger,' quips Heath Ledger.

But there is nothing stranger or perhaps more worrying than the British Board of Film Classification.

Edited by Jim, 06 August 2008 - 04:42 AM.

[Jim]

The Daily Mail.

Bless. The Daily Heil. Hurrah for the Blackshirts.

[Merged with the Batman film thread as that's what it's mainly about, apart from the usual sinister messages hidden in "David Cooke got the job in 2004. His first high-profile decision was to rate as 18 the film Nine Songs, which included graphic scenes of real rather than simulated sex" which will probably work to swell the audience of the film amongst right thinking folk who now know what it is called and will keep an eye out for it so that they can be outraged].

[Loomis]

I thought T3 was underrated. I mean, in the sense that the BBFC gave it too low a rating. And I think the same of TDK, only more so. It should definitely be a 15, as should CASINO ROYALE.

I suspect that TDK will carry a 15 certificate when released on DVD. The BBFC is - or at any rate until recently was - stricter for material "for the home", and it'll give 'em a good opportunity to buckle to tabloid pressure while not losing face, 'coz they can claim they're merely following their own policy.

[Safari Suit]

So seven or eight years after its liberalisation the Tories want to return the BBFC back to the days of the Nasties list. And on the basis of, what, 80 complaints?

The Quiet Man wants to turn the heat up on the BBFC... just a little bit.

[Publius]

But sooner or later something has to topple the dreadful, appalling chick flick known as The Titanic.

All too true. And really, your prediction isn't that far out there. If TDK does gross $600 million, it will have made 26.3% of that in its opening weekend. Compare that to CR, which made 24.4% of its gross in its opening weekend, or Spiderman 2, which made 23.6% of its gross in its opening weekend. Both movies had similarly good word-of-mouth.

My ex flew into a massive rage with me when I tried to convince her that there wouldn't be a sequel to it, whereas she was absolutely unshakeable in her belief that there would be a TITANIC 2 ("Don't be stupid, it's the biggest hit of all time, so of course they'll do another one!").

Well, at least it's better than thinking there'd be a Se7en 2: Ei8ht.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Loomis, I'm happy to report that my wife defies your assessment regarding women and TDK. She liked it quite a bit!

My sister was a bit peeved that Rachel died, because "you can't kill the love interest!"

[Vauxhall]

Loomis, I'm happy to report that my wife defies your assessment regarding women and TDK. She liked it quite a bit!

My sister was a bit peeved that Rachel died, because "you can't kill the love interest!"

Oh dear, she may not like the shaking up of the formula in QUANTUM OF SOLACE then.

[Tarl_Cabot]

Steady on.

Was merely trying to gauge why THE DARK KNIGHT has been so stupidly successful, to the point where people are in all seriousness asking whether it'll outgross TITANIC.

I mean, we all knew that TDK was going to be a massive hit, but this.... it's just ridiculous how much loot it's raking in.

If this were happening with QUANTUM OF SOLACE we'd all be struggling to breathe.

Now, if something makes money on the scale of this new Batman flick, it's usually because it's for some reason or reasons managed to catch the popular mood, connecting with people in an unusually deep way. Evidently, it's not just the chases, fights and explosions that are drawing people in for repeat viewings - there must be something else going on for TDK to be a smash of the magnitude that it is. It must be tickling the world's psyche in some fashion beyond the obvious.

Ergo, I was idly stirring the waters of speculation as to what TDK's hidden X-factor may be. Are young men of the early 21st century finding that the triumvirate of Wayne/Dent/Joker holds up some kind of mirror to them? Does TDK reflect our feelings in this post-9/11 world? Am I talking bollocks? Yes, but it's still a fair question: why has THE DARK KNIGHT become - arguably - the first popcorn franchise blockbuster of the 00s to achieve the status of a genuine phenomenon? How come it's done so frickin' well?

It's a grim movie and we're in some pretty depressing economic/political times.

[bond 16.05.72]

Did you see the comment Keith Vaz a Labour MP made about he wouldn't be comfortable his 11 year old daughter watching DK, well it's a 12 so she shouldn't.

DK probabaly should have been a 15 & CR but the worrying trend to me is the re-classifying of old classics.

Did you see the rating the new Godfather Boxset got, (have you seen the new restored prints what a joy) it got a 15. I still think the content of the first 2 films warrant an 18.

Whats wrong with letting people wait to see things like this, I don't realy think 15 year olds should be able to buy it, it's up to parents if they see fit to show it to them.

I remember working in the Virgin Megastore in Coventry in the UK in 94 and seeing a group of 10 year olds saying they thought Pulp Fiction was better than Rerservoir Dogs. The fact that some misguided idiot let them watch such films is beyond me.

I plan to bring my future children up with responsibility, I can't wait to introduce my future son to the classics but I will do it with a clear understanding that he understands the moral ground before he watches them, which appears to have escaped Parents these days.

Letting your 12 year old play GTA 4 is just so disgusting I can't believe just anyone is allowed to bring up a child.

Though Hollywood is trying to make everything a 12 recently or 15 at worst, I was pleasantly surprised Sweeney Todd didn't get a 15 on release.

[Loomis]

DK probabaly should have been a 15 & CR but the worrying trend to me is the re-classifying of old classics.

Did you see the rating the new Godfather Boxset got, (have you seen the new restored prints what a joy) it got a 15. I still think the content of the first 2 films warrant an 18.

Yeah. I ordered THE TERMINATOR from Amazon the other day, and noticed it carried a 15 certificate. It always used to be an 18. And I can't believe LAYER CAKE got away with a 15.

[sharpshooter]

Debate will probably still continue, but the line regarding Dent's fate in the script is this:

Dent lies at the bottom of the hole, his neck broken. DEAD.

Initially I thought it was just the broken neck. But it is right there in the script, in caps lock DEAD. That's that folks.

[Safari Suit]

It does have some pretty disturbing moments, but I think most 12 year could handle it. Some won't but thems the breaks.

I am not against the reclassification of older films, as while standards change the films themselves don't, and I just wouldn't think it fair that a 15 year could buy Hitman, for example, but not The Terminator, which is tame in comparison.

I think it might be time for a new classification system however.

[Mister Asterix]

[Harmsway]

Debate will probably still continue, but the line regarding Dent's fate in the script is this:

Dent lies at the bottom of the hole, his neck broken. DEAD.

Initially I thought it was just the broken neck. But it is right there in the script, in caps lock DEAD. That's that folks.

And given that the script is authored by the director... yeah, it's a done deal. Nice to know that.

[Judo chop]

Oh man. I’m glad I don’t wear eye make-up. Thank you for that, Mr. *

[dodge]

After the second viewing, I remembered reading of Ledger's preparation for doing The Joker's voice. Among the voices he channeled, I believe, was that of our great country's ultimate joker.

Did anyone else hear echoes of Tricky Dick in such lines as these:

Well, hello, beautiful!
Why so serious?
Let's put a smile on that face!