The Dark Knight: Official Review Thread

Off Topic
301

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Chris Colucci wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Oh, and I think that if the Penguin is too cartoony (though he could be done as simply a “gentleman of crime” with a bird fetish)

Slap 40-50 pudgy pounds onto Adrian Brody, and boom… Oscar-winner as a main villain. No?

Question (unless I missed it previously): Does anyone think they’ll try to bring Robin into this new series? Jumping straight to Nightwing in the next film might be an interesting take on things.

I think they could do Robin well as long as they never actually stick him in that fucking suit. if they portray him as some bad ass kid who just happens to be able to perform gymnastics, it could work.

The concept of Robin is great for kids. Not one of us questioned it growing up. However, realistically, there is no way that would make sense…not the way the comics portrayed it.

In fact, if they played it as if Bruce adopted a number of kids and Dick just happened to stand out as one gifted teenager, then no one would squirm in their seats at the idea. They wouldn’t even necessarily have to live with him.

Notice, they did keep “Batgirl” (Gordon’s daughter) hidden in the shadows in this movie. I guess they are not sold on the girl currently playing that part.[/quote]

I just don’t think there’s any way to do Robin without it being really corny. And with the way these movies have played out so far it wouldn’t make sense to add him in any format.

302

[quote]AngryVader wrote:
WS4JB wrote:
There must be something wrong with me, because the Whole “bat-voice” did not bother me at all.

He doesn’t wanna sound like Bruce Wayne, big whoop.

Shows how solid this movie is that we can only complain about Bale’s voice and build.

I’m glad you said this. I wasn’t bothered by his voice at all either and was starting to think I was the only one.[/quote]

Good point by WS4JB. Speed Kills. There’s the Quick and then there’s the dead. Bullet doesn’t care if your bulky or not, shit is gonna hurt.

The movie is so good that people have to nitpick about the voice.

303

[quote]WolBarret wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
WS4JB wrote:
There must be something wrong with me, because the Whole “bat-voice” did not bother me at all.

He doesn’t wanna sound like Bruce Wayne, big whoop.

Shows how solid this movie is that we can only complain about Bale’s voice and build.

I’m glad you said this. I wasn’t bothered by his voice at all either and was starting to think I was the only one.

Good point by WS4JB. Speed Kills. There’s the Quick and then there’s the dead. Bullet doesn’t care if your bulky or not, shit is gonna hurt.

The movie is so good that people have to nitpick about the voice.[/quote]

Dude, relax. I commented on it, but “nitpicking” is a bit much. It was the only thing that made me think about it being a movie while watching it. Everything else was so incredibly well played overall that you could get lost in it.

304

[quote]Professor X wrote:
WolBarret wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
WS4JB wrote:
There must be something wrong with me, because the Whole “bat-voice” did not bother me at all.

He doesn’t wanna sound like Bruce Wayne, big whoop.

Shows how solid this movie is that we can only complain about Bale’s voice and build.

I’m glad you said this. I wasn’t bothered by his voice at all either and was starting to think I was the only one.

Good point by WS4JB. Speed Kills. There’s the Quick and then there’s the dead. Bullet doesn’t care if your bulky or not, shit is gonna hurt.

The movie is so good that people have to nitpick about the voice.

Dude, relax. I commented on it, but “nitpicking” is a bit much. It was the only thing that made me think about it being a movie while watching it. Everything else was so incredibly well played overall that you could get lost in it.[/quote]

Hell, I didn’t even know you were nitpicking about the voice, X. The only flaw in this film is Rachel’s face. That was solved though.

305

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Lonnie123 wrote:
Professor X wrote:

What was well played was the Joker’s protection of Batman’s identity. Overall, the entire story around the Joker should earn some writers a few awards.

As far as Rachael, I think I missed half of the movie because the couple next to us wouldn’t shut up every time she was on screen.

“Oh, she’s horrible!! Don’t you think she’s ugly, Sweety!!?”

“Oh, yes, that face…EWWWWWWW!!!”

After every fucking scene.

This is why I quit going to movies to begin with.

I didnt get that Joker knew batmans Identity… Only that he knew he loved Rachel, but maybe that was enough to find out it was Bruce. He seemed intent on finding out who he was, but maybe that was just a front. I havent read many of the comics, so if this is understood I’ll shut up.

EVERYONE is baggine on Mally Gyllenhall for being ugly… I didnt think she did a bad job, nor do I think she ugly. I’ve never heard so much negative talk amongst all my friends on an issue like that. Me think they doth pretest too much??

The Joker didn’t know who he was…but when the other guy (the analyst who was going to the press to tell them it was Bruce) went to the media, he is the one who put the threat on his life so he would shut up.

The Joker liked the game he was playing. He thought that he and Batman were meant to play that role forever. I doubt he cared who Batman was by the end of the movie.[/quote]

I think this is exactly what the Joker was concerned with the most. Throughout the movie he kept trying to make people just as twisted as he was. Justify being insane.

In fact Batman gave him a reason to wear the getup that he did. The police could not identify the Joker, the Joker knew this, knew that if they knew who he was he wouldn’t be the Joker. Much like Batman would not be Batman if Gotham knew he was Bruce Wayne.

He knew this was the best way to destroy Batman and let crime take the city back. Bruce Wayne is a mortal and human but the costume/mystique of the Bat scares the criminals. Same reason why Batman could not let the Joker die, if he did the Joker would win.

He would prove that anyone could become much like Dent did, including Batman. Batman being an outlaw is great, the bad guys don’t know what he will do or to what lengths he will live by morally. If he is all good with the cops he becomes just that a cop in a bat suit.

306

[quote]WolBarret wrote:
Pootie Tang wrote:
I really have no interest in seeing cat-woman or killer croc as a main character/villian. In the two movies that were done you had the crebral villan who torments Batman, Ra’s al Ghul using scarecrow as a puppet. Then Joker using the city as his play ground.

Killer croc is hired muscle that mostly does bank jobs and kidnapping. Catwomans story would not fit into the “Reality” of Nolans Batman universe. I mean what would her story be? Only way that it would work would be if she is an official Cat Burgler like in the comics, none of that bitten by a cat bull shit.

Here is food for thought…What about Clock King?

The Clock King? Really?[/quote]

Clock King would fit into Nolan’s Batman Universe very well. Slightly demented, focused on the tiniest detail. Calculating, with a mild hardon for clocks. Sounds like Movie Gold.

307

Hold on. I disagree that it was ‘so good’ that we can ‘only nitpick about Batman’s voice.’ It was a very good film, but not impeccable.

The writing was a tad sloppy when Joker told Batman the two addresses where Dent and Rachel were at.

See, Joker never says which of the two is at what address. He just mouths off two addresses. How does Batman know which one Rachel is at? Because, it is very clear that he would have saved Rachel first.

Someone suggested that Joker was able to foresee Batman going for Rachel instead of Dent, and mislead Batman into thinking Rachel was at Dent’s address, but if that is what the writers intended it was VERY sloppy.

And they should have made the ending a little tighter.

I will watch it again, anyway.

Also, Dent’s storyline was far too abbreviated. They should have just alluded to him and left him out of the film.

Again, I thought Heath Ledger’s performance was better than the film itself. That was a wicked portrayal of a villain. My friend said he could tell in some of the scenes that Joker was being played by someone else, because Ledger died DURING the filming, but I did not notice.

308

Heath died after all his scenes were shot.

309

[quote]Makavali wrote:
Heath died after all his scenes were shot.[/quote]

True. This was not a remake of The Crow.

310

[quote]Makavali wrote:
Heath died after all his scenes were shot.[/quote]

Additionally, he was already working on another film after The Dark Knight when he died.

311

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

I just don’t think there’s any way to do Robin without it being really corny. And with the way these movies have played out so far it wouldn’t make sense to add him in any format.[/quote]

You may be right, but if it was written well enough eliminating that retarded outfit and just making him streetwise enough to aid Batman in some way without actually becoming a ‘sidekick’, I think they could do something with it.

No portrayal of Robin could ever be worse than that Batman and Robin movie with Mr. Freeze. At least we can trust that it can only get better from there.

312

[quote]AngryVader wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Heath died after all his scenes were shot.

Additionally, he was already working on another film after The Dark Knight when he died. [/quote]

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus.

313

[quote]Makavali wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Heath died after all his scenes were shot.

Additionally, he was already working on another film after The Dark Knight when he died.

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus.[/quote]

Yep, that’s the one. It’s interesting how they are getting multiple actors to replace him.

314

[quote]AngryVader wrote:
Yep, that’s the one. It’s interesting how they are getting multiple actors to replace him.[/quote]

Apparently he’d already completed his scenes in one dimension. But yeah, it’s pretty clever. So technically, The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus is Ledger’s final film.

At any rate, I will be seeing TDK in two days. And then again a week later, but I’ll be stoned.

And if it’s as good as the trailers and reviews would have me believe, I’ll do it all over again.

315

[quote]Makavali wrote:
AngryVader wrote:
Yep, that’s the one. It’s interesting how they are getting multiple actors to replace him.

Apparently he’d already completed his scenes in one dimension. But yeah, it’s pretty clever. So technically, The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus is Ledger’s final film.

At any rate, I will be seeing TDK in two days. And then again a week later, but I’ll be stoned.

And if it’s as good as the trailers and reviews would have me believe, I’ll do it all over again.[/quote]

Why did you even come into this thread? This place is riddled with Spoilers and little “Spoiler Alerts”.

316

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
Hold on. I disagree that it was ‘so good’ that we can ‘only nitpick about Batman’s voice.’ It was a very good film, but not impeccable.

The writing was a tad sloppy when Joker told Batman the two addresses where Dent and Rachel were at.

See, Joker never says which of the two is at what address. He just mouths off two addresses. How does Batman know which one Rachel is at? Because, it is very clear that he would have saved Rachel first.

Someone suggested that Joker was able to foresee Batman going for Rachel instead of Dent, and mislead Batman into thinking Rachel was at Dent’s address, but if that is what the writers intended it was VERY sloppy.

And they should have made the ending a little tighter.

.[/quote]

Joker told him the address of both Harvey and Rachel. Watch the scene again you’ll see.

317

[quote]Pootie Tang wrote:
PonceDeLeon wrote:
Hold on. I disagree that it was ‘so good’ that we can ‘only nitpick about Batman’s voice.’ It was a very good film, but not impeccable.

The writing was a tad sloppy when Joker told Batman the two addresses where Dent and Rachel were at.

See, Joker never says which of the two is at what address. He just mouths off two addresses. How does Batman know which one Rachel is at? Because, it is very clear that he would have saved Rachel first.

Someone suggested that Joker was able to foresee Batman going for Rachel instead of Dent, and mislead Batman into thinking Rachel was at Dent’s address, but if that is what the writers intended it was VERY sloppy.

And they should have made the ending a little tighter.

.

Joker told him the address of both Harvey and Rachel. Watch the scene again you’ll see.
[/quote]

Damn right he did. Batman asked for the Rachel address first. Joker hesitated for a moment, gave him the address. Then Batman asked for Dent’s address. All joker did was switch. Batman walked out the door and said “Rachel” after Gordon asked him which address he would go to first.

All Joker did was switch the address and ask for his phone call.

318

[quote]Pootie Tang wrote:
PonceDeLeon wrote:
Hold on. I disagree that it was ‘so good’ that we can ‘only nitpick about Batman’s voice.’ It was a very good film, but not impeccable.

The writing was a tad sloppy when Joker told Batman the two addresses where Dent and Rachel were at.

See, Joker never says which of the two is at what address. He just mouths off two addresses. How does Batman know which one Rachel is at? Because, it is very clear that he would have saved Rachel first.

Someone suggested that Joker was able to foresee Batman going for Rachel instead of Dent, and mislead Batman into thinking Rachel was at Dent’s address, but if that is what the writers intended it was VERY sloppy.

And they should have made the ending a little tighter.

.

Joker told him the address of both Harvey and Rachel. Watch the scene again you’ll see.
[/quote]

Yeah, man. It wasn’t “VERY sloppy writing”, just sloppy watching on your part…

But I do agree that the ending had a bit of a “Lord of the Rings” feel to it (i.e. they wind up one plot twist, you expect the credits soon, but no, here’s something else for Batman to deal with, rinse and repeat a couple of times).

Not that I’m complaining… the more Batman, the better as far as I’m concerned.

And add me down as another who didn’t mind the BatVoice so much. It didn’t even occur to me that he did it to disguise his voice. I just thought it sounded bad ass and suited Batman…

319

[quote]AngryVader wrote:
WS4JB wrote:
There must be something wrong with me, because the Whole “bat-voice” did not bother me at all.

He doesn’t wanna sound like Bruce Wayne, big whoop.

Shows how solid this movie is that we can only complain about Bale’s voice and build.

I’m glad you said this. I wasn’t bothered by his voice at all either and was starting to think I was the only one.[/quote]

I read that his cowl is designed to alter his voice…I don’t remember where.

320

[quote]WolBarret wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Dude, relax. I commented on it, but “nitpicking” is a bit much. It was the only thing that made me think about it being a movie while watching it. Everything else was so incredibly well played overall that you could get lost in it.

Hell, I didn’t even know you were nitpicking about the voice, X. The only flaw in this film is Rachel’s face. That was solved though.[/quote]

I only commented without knowledge of anyone else’s opinion. I still haven’t read the last 10 pages. Fantastic movie, the voice was hardly distracting, but enough for me to notice.

Rachel was definitely a plain Jane. Imagine that. Bruce shows up to the party with three hot ladies and wants the dog face that’s already taken. Ok, dog face is harsh.