Battleground Games Forum
Battleground Games & Hobbies => General Discussion => Topic started by: Jonathan on July 18, 2008, 10:40:47 PM
-
So who has seen the Dark Knight and what are your reactions? I saw it tonight with my dad at the local theatre. The place was almost sold out (had maybe a dozen empty seats) for the 9:30, which made me real happy. I'm friends with the owner, who is also my state rep, and since the Showcase closed down (they're building the new mall, Legacy Place, in Dedham complete with new Showcase Cinema to make Randolph look like a pile of dung) he's been able to get all the blockbusters.
Anyway, I thought the film was much better than Batman Begins and I liked the overall tone of the film. It flowed really well and the acting was quite good. I think, to me, it deserves 4 out of 5 stars. Unfortunately, I still prefer Jack Nicholson as the Joker. He's much more manic to me. There was some nice, psychotic, delivery of lines that worked nicely and the opener was quite good.
As an aside, the trailer for Terminator 4 was nicely done but I was surprised to not see anything for The Watchmen (which I'm told is coming out soon).
-
I just got back from the movie with jared brown and scott. And I have to disagree with you on one thing. I think ledger is the better joker, without giving any of the movie away I'll just say that he played it the way the role should have been play. A pychotic that revels in chaos.
-
He is psychotic and does love chaos for chaos sake (in that way he reminds me of the character Johan from the graphic novel Monster that I'm reading). However, I feel he isn't manic enough and that Jack's Joker is far more manic than Heath's.
-
I agree with Ledger as the better Joker. Ledger was just a psychopath. I also think many of the personality quirks of Ledger's Joker really filled the bill.
"I'm like a dog that chases cars, I would have no idea what to do with it if I caught it."
Jack's Joker was perfect for the tone of Keaton's Batman.
Funny thing is- both follow two supposed origins of the Joker.
-
I thought the movie was really good. I would have liked it to be about 30 minutes shorter (shave a bit off the end) and for them to get rid of Batman's ridiculous voice. Other than that I thought it was great.
It certainly wasn't all hype.
-
As an aside, the trailer for Terminator 4 was nicely done but I was surprised to not see anything for The Watchmen (which I'm told is coming out soon).
We got the Watchmen trailer but not T4.
I think this was possibly the best comic book movie ever. I think it only had very few problems. Mainly the Batvoice. It was ok in Begins because he didn't say much as Batman. The only thing not matching the comic with the Joker was he wore face paint, but it worked for the world Chris Nolan is building. I just wish they could make the rest of the DC movies this good.
-
I toally agree Jared. For me, this is straight up the best comic book movie ever made. All the elements just fit so well, and I really like what Nolan is doing with the franchise.
Saw the Watchmen trailer. Looks like a great big pile of SHIT.
-
The cool thing I found about this one was that the Dark Knight in the comics always had that grim tone to it, kinda like 40k. The Joker played by both Heath and Jack fit the rest of their movies, I think. Defently a good job done though. I liked it.
-
Saw it tonight. I give it:
(http://www.battlegroundgames.com/images/shield_small.jpg)(http://www.battlegroundgames.com/images/shield_small.jpg)(http://www.battlegroundgames.com/images/shield_small.jpg)(http://www.battlegroundgames.com/images/shield_small.jpg)
out of a possible 5.
I'm left feeling very disappointed that I will be denied seeing more of Ledger's awesome portrayal of the Joker in any future Batman installments. The movie seemed to set itself up for future confrontations between the two. Drugs are bad, m'kay?
By far the best scene of the movie is when Batman is interrogating the Joker in Gotham prison. His frustration at not being able to make any progress with his usual tactics was fun to watch. There's some great dialog in that scene, establishing who these two men are, how they are connected, and what they represent to one another.
The film was perhaps a bit overlong, and I would have preferred to see a little more Joker and a little less Harvey Dent. After all is said and done though, this is the best Batman movie to date.
D.
-
I just got back from the movie, and the best joker line was by far "Would you like to see my disappearing pencil trick?"
As for the voice, the people I saw it with said they didnt mind it because this was Bruce Wayne talking to folks that he had contact with on a regular basis and needed to mask it. It also seems to be a bit more husky/gravely because it is him portraying a darker side of himself.
My favorite scene in the movie was the very end, where the Commish has to explain to his son about Batman. I find this to be the best thing ever in any comic to screen adaptation. Our comic hero's are not always loved and revered, and should be taken for what they are. Batman is the Dark Knight, he was the guy who would be willing to turn the key knowing that by doing so he would be saving thousands but condemning a thousand more who have had their opportunity. He is the prisoner who threw out the key and shamed the warden, he is something that many person's never dream they could be.
Some people did not like Aaron Eckhart's Two Face, but I think it was spot on. The way the movie moved showed the emotions that drove Dent to do the things that he did.
I give it 4.5 out of 5 for the lack of a batman 3 without Ledger. His portrayal of Joker was amazing as were the stories about how he got the scars on his face...
-
I found Two Face to be one of the most enjoyable aspects of the film. I seriously disliked the husky Batman voice along with the ending's inability to tie the strings together (so...what happened with the people of the ferries? Nothing really handled there).
I know I will remain a minority on this, and as such will not beat a dead horse, but I firmly believe this is not as good as Burton's Batman. This was a good film but it simply falls short on all counts of the original. Batman creator Bob Kane wanted Jack Nicholson, and viewed him as the best person to play the Joker, from the beginning and Jack simply tops Heath. Heath did a good job acting but not good enough. Burton did an incredible job directing, and used The Dark Knight Returns as inspiration for the film, and Keaton was incredible. He did a phenomenal job in Beetlejuice, such a great dark comedy, and it shows in Batman (1989).
The remakes, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, have made significant improvements in darkening the tone of the films but it is tough to go against such a strong original film. Remakes, usually in my opinion, fall flat on their face. Batman Begins succumbed to that and Dark Knight did a good job of avoiding that. It deserves 4 out of 5 stars but it is not better than Burton's Batman. Ask me in 9 years and I'll let you know if I think Dark Knight stands the test of time.
As an aside, I also enjoyed the various stories accounting for The Joker's scars. Definitely interesting.
-
Burton's Batman was a very good movie. It has held up fairly well almost twenty years later, a feat that the Dark Knight may or may not succeed at (personally, I think it will be widely remembered as the better of the two films).
Both movies have their flaws, but I feel that Burton's Batman mistepped in some really horrible ways. First was the abysmally bad use of Prince music. It's a small thing perhaps, and Danny Elfman's rich score helped make up for it, but the "Gotham parade scene" is a really terrible piece of filmmaking. There's something about the scene that seems off - even the sound is badly mixed.
Jack Nicholson was a great Joker - no doubt about it. But is it fair to say he topped Heath Ledger's acting? Jack Nicholson's Joker was essentially Jack Nicholson with clown make-up on. I mean let's be serious, Jack Nicholson, pretty much IS the Joker already, or at least, he is some version of the Joker.
I realize that we are talking opinions here, but Ledger tapped into something much more raw and visceral than what Nicholson was able to do. Of course, whether or not this is just a byproduct of a good script is unknowable, but Ledger's Joker is ultimately more fearsome, intense, and enigmatic.
I'm not sure how one could argue that Ledger's role wasn't deeper than Nicholson's. Burton's Joker is a vengeful clown. Nolan's Joker is an "agent of chaos" - more disturbing, more wicked, more maniacal. His stands as a much better foil to Batman and all that he stands for. Ledger's Joker emphasizes and enhances the heroic nature of Batman - rather than merely providing a source for Batman to revenge his murdered parents.
But the big flaw of Burton's Batman - the one that the film will never be able to escape - is that it kills the Joker. This mistake is it's biggest blunder. It highlights a disconnect from the Batman legacy and reveals the vanity of the filmmakers. It was, in my opinion, a selfish decision.
Ultimately (and oddly), it's hard to compare the two films. Burton's version is very cartoonish and gives us a "happy" sort of psychopath. Nolan's Batman is darker and more realistic, and gives us a Joker that is far closer to the one depicted in "The Dark Knight Returns."
Bob Kane may have always wanted Jack Nicholson to play the Joker, but I'd argue that's only because he never saw Heath Ledger give it a try.
In case it isn't apparent yet, I like talking about movies.
-
But the big flaw of Burton's Batman - the one that the film will never be able to escape - is that it kills the Joker. This mistake is it's biggest blunder. It highlights a disconnect from the Batman legacy and reveals the vanity of the filmmakers. It was, in my opinion, a selfish decision.
I think they are forced into it by the medium, more then anything else. Comics are a periodical and need recurring themes/heroes/villains to make next months sale. Movies are self contained and people tend to look for a beginning, middle and end in one sitting. When Burton's movie came out, it revived the Superhero Movie genre. I don't believe there was a serious expectation of multiple Bat movies. With this newest Batman, it follows on the heels of other successful superhero moves and they could plan accordingly, as X-Men did.
The filmmakers aren't so much selfish as just working with what they believed would sell (IMHO). No movie will be able to completely encapsulate any comic book of decent length. But there is a good side to this as well. I don't think Burton's Batman would be anywhere as good if it stuck strictly to the rules.
...and I haven;t seen the new Batman yet. :(
-
I'll agree with that idea, that burton's batman movies may have lacked the foresight to have a reoccuring villan like the joker. I also acknowledge people's irritation of Bale's "monster" voice when he is batman. But I pose to you, "How does one mask himself effectively hide his true identity?" In a comic you don't hear the voice, like until Jared explained to me how superman has a putty face I did not understand the whole glasses off and he is un-recognizable thing.
Obviously we are all trying to keep this topic going without giving away points of the movie, so to comment on the ferry thought. I think that the idea you should have is that with the immediate threat gone there is no real danger and therefor you can assume that they were ok.
And I have to say my favorite conversation and line in the movie was the dialogue between the joker and batman. Specifically I just ate up the part where the joker refers to himself as "an unstoppable force meeting a immovable object". Something about that symbolism just hit the mark for me, it just seemed to embody the whole movie.
-
And I have to say my favorite conversation and line in the movie was the dialogue between the joker and batman. Specifically I just ate up the part where the joker refers to himself as "an unstoppable force meeting a immovable object". Something about that symbolism just hit the mark for me, it just seemed to embody the whole movie.
Or it could be a reference to World of Warcraft and the Alterac Valley rewards that were once totally overpowered...
-
Or it could be a reference to World of Warcraft and the Alterac Valley rewards that were once totally overpowered...
Did you just soil Batman's legacy with a World of Warcraft reference?
-
Or it could be a reference to World of Warcraft and the Alterac Valley rewards that were once totally overpowered...
Did you just soil Batman's legacy with a World of Warcraft reference?
Or did the Batman legacy soil itself by making pop culture references to blizzard entertainment?
-
Saw the movie. Loved it. Heath ledger was a scary ass joker. Super for the part.
Yeah yeah less mania, but frightening as hell and the mania was there it was just a bit different. The interrogation room is a good example.
The two face special effects sucked IMO. Could have done a lot better if they didn't go over the top but hey it's a comic book movie.
Morgan Freedman rocked. I loved the blackmail scene. One of the best in the movie. Same with the look on his face when the computer was self destructing.
Over all best Batman movie IMO.
-
Or it could be a reference to World of Warcraft and the Alterac Valley rewards that were once totally overpowered...
Did you just soil Batman's legacy with a World of Warcraft reference?
Or did the Batman legacy soil itself by making pop culture references to blizzard entertainment?
I'm pretty sure Alfred didn't walk out and say "Mr. Wayne, were you up poopsocking again"
-
I realize that this may be a dead thread now, but I thought I'd mix in my own two cents, since at this point most of us have already seen the movie. And if some of the regular readers of the board haven't seen it yet, they probably won't mind some of the plot being given away at this point, or else they probably would've made more of an effort to go see it by now.
At any rate, this movie, along with Batman Begins, trumps the Tim Burton series of Batman. And the most important reason why I believe this is true, is said very well by Derek in this quote.
But the big flaw of Burton's Batman - the one that the film will never be able to escape - is that it kills the Joker. This mistake is it's biggest blunder. It highlights a disconnect from the Batman legacy and reveals the vanity of the filmmakers. It was, in my opinion, a selfish decision.
Indeed, killing off the Joker was a selfish act, and though recurring villains aren't a popular theme in movies, it doesn't change the "disconnect" shown between the Batman that we've always known from the comics to the one that we see for the first time on the big screen. Derek's opinion on this matter also reminded me of the my favorite line in Dark Knight, quoted by Jester (Sorry, I don't know who you really are, so I'm referring to you by your BG handle)
Specifically I just ate up the part where the joker refers to himself as "an unstoppable force meeting a immovable object". Something about that symbolism just hit the mark for me, it just seemed to embody the whole movie.
The moment I heard the Joker say those words to Batman, it had finally hit me. Hard. Batman was never, and will never be a killer. That was and has always been his motif; a motif that Burton truly forgot when he directed the first Batman film. And to add to Jesters' comment about it "embodying" the whole movie, the line tells the audience that just because the villain doesn't die in the end of the movie, it doesn't mean that the hero doesn't win.
All in all, I believe it was a very well done movie, with enough story mixed with plenty of action to keep the audience at the edge of their seats. I would be remiss if I didn't say that I would've looked very forward to seeing Heath Ledger returning as the Joker.
Granted, this is purely semantic, but I do firmly believe Ledger played the Joker better than Jack Nicholson did. As Jonathan had put it, Jack's manic interpretation of the Joker left us all with the imagery of how we all thought the Joker to be; maniacal, sick, twisted, high pitched laughter, and childish (in the adult like way). Dating back even further to when Cesar Romero played the Joker during the TV series, this was the only image the audience had to interpret what the "real life" Joker would be.
And then comes Ledger's Joker; soft spoken, violently diplomatic, and above all else, a criminal mastermind. He knew how to provoke Batman in every shape and form, and just when things started turning out well for Batman, the tables flipped immediately the other way. Not to say that Nicholson's Joker didn't provoke Batman, but his excuse was simply "You made do it". IMO, this a lame excuse of revenge to go after someone, not to mention unoriginal. However, in the Dark Knight, noone made Ledger's Joker do anything. He did those things to Batman because he thought Batman was "just too much fun".
He managed to manipulate several situations into causing Batman to choose between the lives and well being of innocent bystanders, and those Batman cared for personally (ie - choosing who to save between Harvey and Rachel, and the situation with the boats at the end). Joker pushed him to the point where he lost the person he cared for most, AND STILL, Batman would not bring himself to kill the Joker in the end. Thus putting more emphasis on the Jokers expression of "an unstoppable force meeting an immovable object". As the Joker said, Batman truly is "incorruptible", which is probably the biggest difference between Chris Nolan's Batman, and Tim Burton's Batman.
In closing, I'll quote another line from the movie, which I firmly believe supports my opinion of Ledger being the better Joker. I believe it's this line, along with a few others throughout the movie, that makes Ledger, not necessarily a better Joker, but a more convincing Joker. Well written scripts aside, it's lines like these that show just how twisted, I think, the Joker should be portrayed.
Thanks for reading, everyone.
Joker, talking to Det. Stephens:
"Do you wanna know why I use a knife? Guns are too quick. You can't savor all the... little... emotions. In... you see, in their last moments, people show you who they really are. So in a way, I know your friends better than you ever did. Would you like to know which of them were cowards?"
-
Well said, Ben.