OT: Batman: The Dark Knight (possible spoilers)
Moderators: Bill_Abner, ScoopBrady
Saw the movie this morning, and I have to say it met my lofty expectations after I really enjoyed Batman Begins.
What surprised me a little was the difference in scope between the first movie and this one. The first one was focused on personal psychology (mainly on fear), and was really about a few characters. This movie was more about public morality and choices, and the whole movie just felt bigger. The action sequences involved more people and covered more ground, but you also felt the gravity of the whole city with angry mobs and whatnot throughout. Impressive stuff.
I was also a little surprised as to how little screen time Heath Ledger had. At times he felt more like an idea than an actually present character. Surely he stole nearly every scene in which he appeared though. Oscar-worthy for supporting actor? Merits consideration, but not a slam dunk IMO.
Movie wasn't perfect--a little long, and for some reason I can't quite put my finger on, the turning of Harvey Dent just didn't feel quite believable to me. On a broader scale though Mac is right--a rare movie that truly delivered on all fronts.
What surprised me a little was the difference in scope between the first movie and this one. The first one was focused on personal psychology (mainly on fear), and was really about a few characters. This movie was more about public morality and choices, and the whole movie just felt bigger. The action sequences involved more people and covered more ground, but you also felt the gravity of the whole city with angry mobs and whatnot throughout. Impressive stuff.
I was also a little surprised as to how little screen time Heath Ledger had. At times he felt more like an idea than an actually present character. Surely he stole nearly every scene in which he appeared though. Oscar-worthy for supporting actor? Merits consideration, but not a slam dunk IMO.
Movie wasn't perfect--a little long, and for some reason I can't quite put my finger on, the turning of Harvey Dent just didn't feel quite believable to me. On a broader scale though Mac is right--a rare movie that truly delivered on all fronts.
Naples39 wrote:Saw the movie this morning, and I have to say it met my lofty expectations after I really enjoyed Batman Begins.
What surprised me a little was the difference in scope between the first movie and this one. The first one was focused on personal psychology (mainly on fear), and was really about a few characters. This movie was more about public morality and choices, and the whole movie just felt bigger. The action sequences involved more people and covered more ground, but you also felt the gravity of the whole city with angry mobs and whatnot throughout. Impressive stuff.
I was also a little surprised as to how little screen time Heath Ledger had. At times he felt more like an idea than an actually present character. Surely he stole nearly every scene in which he appeared though. Oscar-worthy for supporting actor? Merits consideration, but not a slam dunk IMO.
Movie wasn't perfect--a little long, and for some reason I can't quite put my finger on, the turning of Harvey Dent just didn't feel quite believable to me. On a broader scale though Mac is right--a rare movie that truly delivered on all fronts.
VERY well said. My feeling about the movie exactly!
XBL Gamertag: Spooky Disco
Spooky wrote:Naples39 wrote:Saw the movie this morning, and I have to say it met my lofty expectations after I really enjoyed Batman Begins.
What surprised me a little was the difference in scope between the first movie and this one. The first one was focused on personal psychology (mainly on fear), and was really about a few characters. This movie was more about public morality and choices, and the whole movie just felt bigger. The action sequences involved more people and covered more ground, but you also felt the gravity of the whole city with angry mobs and whatnot throughout. Impressive stuff.
I was also a little surprised as to how little screen time Heath Ledger had. At times he felt more like an idea than an actually present character. Surely he stole nearly every scene in which he appeared though. Oscar-worthy for supporting actor? Merits consideration, but not a slam dunk IMO.
Movie wasn't perfect--a little long, and for some reason I can't quite put my finger on, the turning of Harvey Dent just didn't feel quite believable to me. On a broader scale though Mac is right--a rare movie that truly delivered on all fronts.
VERY well said. My feeling about the movie exactly!
I'll second that. Well said. I do feel ledger has plenty of screen time.
WARNING: SLIGHT SPOILERS
I think you're on to something about Dent's transformation. Perhaps they could have made it a little more believable, although I didn't feel it was done poorly by any stretch. He goes through a horribly traumatic experience, is finally fed up with the rules and politics, and he understandably falls over the edge.
It's kind of funny, toward the end of the movie it did feel a little long, but at the same time, I didn't want it to end. When Dent finally turns I was praying it wasn't going to end. I was thinking, "on no, has it been 2:30 already"? I was relieved to see it keep going and for Two Face to actually have something to do in this film instead of just saving him for next time.
I also felt that they could have kept going with Two Face. He didn't really have much time to be a real villain. I honestly wouldn't have been opposed to it being a 4 hour epic, with maybe an intermission half way through. I was enjoying myself that much.
I would also like to comment on how great it was to see this at the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood. Although the place is expensive ($14 or $15 a person), it was great knowing that we bought tickets over a week in advance and had assigned seats right in the middle with a great view. No waiting in line. Also, it's one of the few theaters where you don't have to worry about out of focus picture. The sound was also amazingly good. I've seen plenty of films there but this was probably my best overall experience.
"Be tolerant of those who describe a sporting moment as their best ever. We do not lack imagination, nor have we had sad and barren lives; it is just that real life is paler, duller, and contains less potential for unexpected delirium." -Nick Hornby
SPOILER ALERT
If I had to criticize one thing about this fantastic movie it'd be exactly that. Realistically though it isn't like we can have every single bad guy sticking around for each movie but Two-Faces short lived foray in gotham was a bit of a bummer.LAking wrote: I also felt that they could have kept going with Two Face. He didn't really have much time to be a real villain. I honestly wouldn't have been opposed to it being a 4 hour epic, with maybe an intermission half way through. I was enjoying myself that much.
Agree..macsomjrr wrote:SPOILER ALERT
If I had to criticize one thing about this fantastic movie it'd be exactly that. Realistically though it isn't like we can have every single bad guy sticking around for each movie but Two-Faces short lived foray in gotham was a bit of a bummer.LAking wrote: I also felt that they could have kept going with Two Face. He didn't really have much time to be a real villain. I honestly wouldn't have been opposed to it being a 4 hour epic, with maybe an intermission half way through. I was enjoying myself that much.
Im looking forward to the directors cut.
Great movie!!!
-
brendanrfoley
- Panda Cub
- Posts: 182
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 4:00 am
- Location: Cary, NC
SPOILERS
SPOILERS BELOW
I enjoyed The Dark Knight, but do feel the movie was a little long. I also thought the subplot with the two ferries was a little much.
In my opinion, I would have loved to see Two Face "vanish" after telling Det. Ramirez she lives another day. He should have not kidnapped Gordon's family.
Meanwhile, Batman and Gordon track the Joker to the building and rescue the hostages. The ending stands as is -- the Joker saying he cannot kill Batman because he's too much fun. But, he's brought Harvey down to "their" level.
The film ends with The Joker locked up and Two Face missing. It would have shaved 25 minutes of a very good film -- and likely made it a masterpiece.
I enjoyed The Dark Knight, but do feel the movie was a little long. I also thought the subplot with the two ferries was a little much.
In my opinion, I would have loved to see Two Face "vanish" after telling Det. Ramirez she lives another day. He should have not kidnapped Gordon's family.
Meanwhile, Batman and Gordon track the Joker to the building and rescue the hostages. The ending stands as is -- the Joker saying he cannot kill Batman because he's too much fun. But, he's brought Harvey down to "their" level.
The film ends with The Joker locked up and Two Face missing. It would have shaved 25 minutes of a very good film -- and likely made it a masterpiece.
-
brendanrfoley
- Panda Cub
- Posts: 182
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 4:00 am
- Location: Cary, NC
I doubt there will be a director's cut. A director's cut implies that the director was forced to cut scenes for non artistic reasons, like pressure studio execs. It's the cut that they intended to release but some suit thought it wouldn't be marketable.brendanrfoley wrote:I'm not sure Nolan does "director cuts." Is there an extended version of Batman Begins I do not know about?XXXIV wrote: Agree..
Im looking forward to the directors cut.
Great movie!!!
With a movie like this, with so much hype and very early critical buzz, there is no need for a studio exec to come in a try to change the film to make it more marketable. I'm sure Nolan had free reign and what we see in the theaters is exactly what he intended us to see.
EDIT: you know, now that I think about it, the MPAA COULD have asked them to cut some violence out of it to keep it at PG:13, although I'm guessing with a movie like this, with such huge financial backing, the MPAA wouldn't dare touch it.
"Be tolerant of those who describe a sporting moment as their best ever. We do not lack imagination, nor have we had sad and barren lives; it is just that real life is paler, duller, and contains less potential for unexpected delirium." -Nick Hornby
Just a thought...LAking wrote:I doubt there will be a director's cut. A director's cut implies that the director was forced to cut scenes for non artistic reasons, like pressure studio execs. It's the cut that they intended to release but some suit thought it wouldn't be marketable.brendanrfoley wrote:I'm not sure Nolan does "director cuts." Is there an extended version of Batman Begins I do not know about?XXXIV wrote: Agree..
Im looking forward to the directors cut.
Great movie!!!
With a movie like this, with so much hype and very early critical buzz, there is no need for a studio exec to come in a try to change the film to make it more marketable. I'm sure Nolan had free reign and what we see in the theaters is exactly what he intended us to see.
EDIT: you know, now that I think about it, the MPAA COULD have asked them to cut some violence out of it to keep it at PG:13, although I'm guessing with a movie like this, with such huge financial backing, the MPAA wouldn't dare touch it.
The way the last 30 minutes doesnt flow like the first 2 hours... I thought maybe he might have cut some of it because it would just have been too long.
I dont know Nolans history.
Re: SPOILERS
My friend made the same exact point as we were coming out of the theatre, and I'll say what I told him then.brendanrfoley wrote:SPOILERS BELOW
I enjoyed The Dark Knight, but do feel the movie was a little long. I also thought the subplot with the two ferries was a little much.
In my opinion, I would have loved to see Two Face "vanish" after telling Det. Ramirez she lives another day. He should have not kidnapped Gordon's family.
Meanwhile, Batman and Gordon track the Joker to the building and rescue the hostages. The ending stands as is -- the Joker saying he cannot kill Batman because he's too much fun. But, he's brought Harvey down to "their" level.
The film ends with The Joker locked up and Two Face missing. It would have shaved 25 minutes of a very good film -- and likely made it a masterpiece.
It works well from an action standpoint, but causes serious problems thematically and completely changes the significance of the ending. As I mentioned before, the whole movie is about moral choices, and you take away Batman stopping two face and choosing to be the gotham's dark knight, and the movie loses a good chunk of its soul. The whole story arc of Batman becoming something different than a hero would be incomplete.
If I were trying to get down the length of the movie, I would've cut into the Lao storyline. He was ultimately an ancillary character, and that part of the movie could've been tidier and briefer.
-
brendanrfoley
- Panda Cub
- Posts: 182
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 4:00 am
- Location: Cary, NC
SPOILERS BELOW
I personally loved the Lau story line. Seeing Batman soar above Hong Kong was fascinating -- and the way they set up his extradition of Lau is perfect (in my opinion).
I think the first hour and 45 minutes of TDK is one of the best movies I've ever seen -- and I am not being hyperbolic. But the final 45 minutes lost steam. They were still good -- but the movie went from A+ to B+. It was enough of a drop off, in my opinion, to leave me with a slight sense of disappointment walking out of the theater.
I am also sad Two Face is dead. He is a great character and was wonderfully played by Aaron Eckhart. Even he didn't know what was going to happen when he flipped that coin. He was also (in my opinion) the only villain that could have given Batman run for his money in a Joker-less third film.
All that said, I am softening a bit on my criticism. There are some incredible moments in TDK. The big rig chase, Batman's interrogation of the Joker, and the Joker's hospital scene are breathtaking. Simply incredible stuff. I want to -- and will -- see it again soon.
I personally loved the Lau story line. Seeing Batman soar above Hong Kong was fascinating -- and the way they set up his extradition of Lau is perfect (in my opinion).
I think the first hour and 45 minutes of TDK is one of the best movies I've ever seen -- and I am not being hyperbolic. But the final 45 minutes lost steam. They were still good -- but the movie went from A+ to B+. It was enough of a drop off, in my opinion, to leave me with a slight sense of disappointment walking out of the theater.
I am also sad Two Face is dead. He is a great character and was wonderfully played by Aaron Eckhart. Even he didn't know what was going to happen when he flipped that coin. He was also (in my opinion) the only villain that could have given Batman run for his money in a Joker-less third film.
All that said, I am softening a bit on my criticism. There are some incredible moments in TDK. The big rig chase, Batman's interrogation of the Joker, and the Joker's hospital scene are breathtaking. Simply incredible stuff. I want to -- and will -- see it again soon.
Saw it, loved it, sad there won't be more Joker.... at least Heath as the Joker.
The Joker is Batman's muse, as it were. To me, he's his Lex Luthor to Supes, or (a modern example) Venom to Spidey.
I can't imagine a Batman without a Joker.
I wish Two Faced had lived too, but it fit the end of the story, and led to the choice by Batman which should colour the third movie.
As for the ferry scene, I think it was extremely important actually. Like Bats said, it showed that the citizens of Gotham still had hope that the "new dawn" was coming. I've always loved Gotham as a setting, as it always reminds me of a city drenched in despair and ruthlessness.... unlike say NYC or Metropolis.
The Joker is Batman's muse, as it were. To me, he's his Lex Luthor to Supes, or (a modern example) Venom to Spidey.
I can't imagine a Batman without a Joker.
I wish Two Faced had lived too, but it fit the end of the story, and led to the choice by Batman which should colour the third movie.
As for the ferry scene, I think it was extremely important actually. Like Bats said, it showed that the citizens of Gotham still had hope that the "new dawn" was coming. I've always loved Gotham as a setting, as it always reminds me of a city drenched in despair and ruthlessness.... unlike say NYC or Metropolis.
gamertag: Ace EZ
Once a Dragon, a Dragon for life!
Once a Dragon, a Dragon for life!
A couple quick things:
I saw it, thought is was okay but horribly paced; there is a solid 100 minutes but not 150. Not really a fan of having Batman guest star in his own films (seemed a bit too much like Batman Returns in that regard), but that was the story the filmmakers shot. It would be like Bond being in twenty minutes of a Bond flick, even if he is ostensibly looming over the actions of others.
Are you sure Two-Face is dead? They set up a fall of a similar distance with Eric Robert's Italian mob boss, specifically saying it shouldn't (and doesn't) kill him, and Batman survives the same drop as Dent. Could they be setting up a "we whisked Harvey away and hope to reform him and give him his face back" reveal in a future flick? They faked Gordon's death, after all.
Did anyone pick up on Mister Reese = Mysteries? Some people are saying they might be setting him up as the Riddler, who was Edward Nigma (enigma). His ability to ferret out puzzles, his accounting, etc all fit the same profile as the traditional Riddler. He definitely has a grudge and thinks he's smarter than Batman.
I saw it, thought is was okay but horribly paced; there is a solid 100 minutes but not 150. Not really a fan of having Batman guest star in his own films (seemed a bit too much like Batman Returns in that regard), but that was the story the filmmakers shot. It would be like Bond being in twenty minutes of a Bond flick, even if he is ostensibly looming over the actions of others.
Are you sure Two-Face is dead? They set up a fall of a similar distance with Eric Robert's Italian mob boss, specifically saying it shouldn't (and doesn't) kill him, and Batman survives the same drop as Dent. Could they be setting up a "we whisked Harvey away and hope to reform him and give him his face back" reveal in a future flick? They faked Gordon's death, after all.
Did anyone pick up on Mister Reese = Mysteries? Some people are saying they might be setting him up as the Riddler, who was Edward Nigma (enigma). His ability to ferret out puzzles, his accounting, etc all fit the same profile as the traditional Riddler. He definitely has a grudge and thinks he's smarter than Batman.
I think two-face is definitely dead. Earlier in the movie Batman survived the fall from his penthouse with Rachel. In the context of the movie there is nothing suspect about Batman surviving the fall and two-face dying.EZSnappin wrote:Are you sure Two-Face is dead? They set up a fall of a similar distance with Eric Robert's Italian mob boss, specifically saying it shouldn't (and doesn't) kill him, and Batman survives the same drop as Dent. Could they be setting up a "we whisked Harvey away and hope to reform him and give him his face back" reveal in a future flick? They faked Gordon's death, after all.
VERY interesting. I could see that now that you mention it.Did anyone pick up on Mister Reese = Mysteries? Some people are saying they might be setting him up as the Riddler, who was Edward Nigma (enigma). His ability to ferret out puzzles, his accounting, etc all fit the same profile as the traditional Riddler. He definitely has a grudge and thinks he's smarter than Batman.
I think he's dead too; I just wish he wasn't, because I want to see what Eckhart would do with more time in the makeup.Naples39 wrote:I think two-face is definitely dead. Earlier in the movie Batman survived the fall from his penthouse with Rachel. In the context of the movie there is nothing suspect about Batman surviving the fall and two-face dying..EZSnappin wrote:Are you sure Two-Face is dead? They set up a fall of a similar distance with Eric Robert's Italian mob boss, specifically saying it shouldn't (and doesn't) kill him, and Batman survives the same drop as Dent. Could they be setting up a "we whisked Harvey away and hope to reform him and give him his face back" reveal in a future flick? They faked Gordon's death, after all.
Speaking of the fall with Rachel - did I miss something or was that the end of the scene? Did the Joker just leave the party and stop searching for Dent? Did he not notice that one room where he couldn't seem to get the door to open? Either I'm blanking out or they didn't resolve that sequence very well.
You didnt blank out. There was a little hole there. We just have to assume he left. She asks, after the fall, if Harvey is okay and he says yes.EZSnappin wrote:I think he's dead too; I just wish he wasn't, because I want to see what Eckhart would do with more time in the makeup.Naples39 wrote:I think two-face is definitely dead. Earlier in the movie Batman survived the fall from his penthouse with Rachel. In the context of the movie there is nothing suspect about Batman surviving the fall and two-face dying..EZSnappin wrote:Are you sure Two-Face is dead? They set up a fall of a similar distance with Eric Robert's Italian mob boss, specifically saying it shouldn't (and doesn't) kill him, and Batman survives the same drop as Dent. Could they be setting up a "we whisked Harvey away and hope to reform him and give him his face back" reveal in a future flick? They faked Gordon's death, after all.
Speaking of the fall with Rachel - did I miss something or was that the end of the scene? Did the Joker just leave the party and stop searching for Dent? Did he not notice that one room where he couldn't seem to get the door to open? Either I'm blanking out or they didn't resolve that sequence very well.
I think the last 30 mins with Eckhart was Batman Begins 3 stuck to the end of the Dark Knight.
