Batman carries on beginning in ... The Dark Knight

Already have.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v417/albaalba/ilx/n562993899_592918_928.jpg

Just saw this last night. i enjoyed it, and ledger and oldman are just as good as everybdy says.

would have agreed with most of what contederizer has said wrt the movie's political sympathies, but then the thought occurred to me that if the film really was bush-sympathetic, then the good guys would just have taken out the joker in the street after the awesome truck stunt, and won.

Batman keeps to his 'rule' and this allows the joker (who doesn't have any such rules) to wreak further havoc, and that seemed to be the dilemma the movie posed- is claiming the moral victory worth the extra damage caused in a situation where the opposition have no rules, no geneva conventions, etc?

on a purely film-fan note, i think it should have ended after rachel's death and harvey's awakening, with the joker in custody. the remaining 40 or so minutes was clumsy, muddled and unneccessary, and was in essence a completely different story and tone to what had gone before, and didn't really work for me.

i really had a problem with the joker managing to rig the only three ferries that were being used to transport people from gotham. hundreds of barrels of gas, and, uh, nobody checked the engine room? and his escape from detention just plain sucked.

on a purely film-fan note, i think it should have ended after rachel's death and harvey's awakening, with the joker in custody. the remaining 40 or so minutes was clumsy, muddled and unneccessary, and was in essence a completely different story and tone to what had gone before, and didn't really work for me.

I've heard a number of people say this, and I tend to agree. Except it would probably be better ending after the Joker escapes and Caine has a chance to deliver his line about burning down the forest. Not that I think the film would have been quite satisfactory ending anywhere in the existing line, but yeah, with some work.

The Two-Face transformation was unconvincing and rushed, despite some good work with the Joker in the hospital. His disapproval at Lieutenant Gordon not rooting out bent cops didn't seem adequate fuel for his fire, nor their decision to try to save him before Rachel. Talking of which, that Joker's whole "who will you choose to save and who will you condemn to death" bomb canard made no sense. If it had just been one guy (esp. Batman) it would have worked, but they had the whole police department and Batman at their disposal - there was no problem splitting and heading to both locations. Rachel's just seemed too far away, or the police were too slow.

Generally, this film was far less tightly focused that Batman Begins. I had nothing to consistently grip on to.

http://occasionalsuperheroine.blogspot.com/2008/07/johnny-depp-to-play-riddler-in-batman.html

i was actually looking through the list of batman villains on wikipedia last night since the topic of a third movie came up....having a hard time imagining almost all of those characters existing in the universe created by nolan.

Anyone else notice the resemblance between the spoiler scene where they're trying to prevent a political assassination/Gordon bites itspoiler and the climax of "The Day of the Jackal"?

yeah i was thinking that as i was watching it.

Did anyone ever make it through the 90s jackal?

i was actually looking through the list of batman villains on wikipedia last night since the topic of a third movie came up....having a hard time imagining almost all of those characters existing in the universe created by nolan.

anarky would fit in brilliantly methinks

i was actually looking through the list of batman villains on wikipedia last night since the topic of a third movie came up....having a hard time imagining almost all of those characters existing in the universe created by nolan.

Deadshot would be great. Maybe Bane, if he were done correctly.

Yeah, given the care that's gone into these flicks, I can't imagine they're already casting when a script hasn't even been written yet (but IN A SHOCKER it's not like I have any idea how Hollywood works).

The Riddler or Penguin could work well in Nolan's more muted Gothamverse, tho -- it's not like they actually put Two-Face into his half-purple suit after the accident, or gave the Joker a squirting flower. Still hoping for Catwoman, tho, maybe played by Michelle Monaghan or someone equally attractive / demure w/ some chops.

A Bane / Hugo Strange mash-up could work, tho they already went the "crazy scientist" route. I'd hope they don't go the "I WILL BREAK THE BATMAN" route -- I don't want to know what that would sound like.

I'm surprised no one's suggested MAN-BAT

this was pretty fantastic - too long. definitely would've been nice if they'd trimmed a bit of the fat.

and now to plow through 300 messages....

> I'm surprised no one's suggested MAN-BAT

No one but me.

Ha -- back to the RIF program for me!

if they do make a third movie, omg plz don't do the Riddler.

Maybe it's just me, but I can't see how the Penguin can play in any half-way realistic scenario. Goes for a lot of Bat-villains, which may limit how far this series can go.

I agree. I think they've sort of hit the wall for Batman as social commentary/crime drama with this one. Like I said when I suggested a Man-Bat/Catwoman/Killer Croc/Hugo Strange plot, it would be a massive shift in tone.

Mixed feelings about this, it could've been a fantastic film with a healthy dose of script editing. The Joker was unabashedly terrific, not only in terms of Ledger's performance, but in the whole interpretation of the character, which was one of the best I've seen on either the screen or the page. Bale was solid (slightly silly Batvoice aside), and there was a strong sense of Batman inhabiting a larger mythos throughout. The character's iconic status was payed suitable respect.

There was a sense of the film biting off more than it could chew though. I get the idea that it was supposed to be a sprawling crime thriller as much as a cape movie, but the writing wasn't anywhere near the standard of the best examples of that genre. Also, it was just too talky - lots of instances of momentum being slowed while the characters stopped beating on each other to expound on their philosophical viewpoints. If the writers are doing their jobs, the characters shouldn't have to explain the subtext.

Finally, it could've done without the whole Two Face thing. If it had just set the (potentially very intriguing) character up for next time that would've been fine, but as the meat of his arc was crammed into the last half hour it just came off as rushed, and I for one didn't give much of a shit and just wanted to get back to the Joker. Didn't help that I didn't think Eckhart was particularly good.

Anyway, it was consistently entertaining and it's nice to see a blockbuster trying to deliver more than thrills. It's frustrating that it fell short of the greatness that was in its reach though.

P.S. should've been a 15 - the little kids in the audience were FUCKING TERRIFIED.

x-post -- My friend Tom and I were talking about that on the way back from the IMAX showing (which was indeed all that) -- I can see how they could try it but basically it would have to be in some sort of distressed/warped scenario, if you like, less emphasis on superpowers and more on the idee fixe or the symbolism.

Penguin = squat guy w/ a large nose & a little hitch in his giddy-up! How hard is that?

(xpost)

OK. Tony Soprano in spats. Now, how are they going to fit a gritty, real, Robin into this Bat-verse?

Yeah, exactly - Batman invokes an animal to inspire fear in others and draw power into himself. It's practically a spirit-totem thing.

xp to Ned.

kinda agree about the shoehorning of the Two-Face arc into the last third. I had been expecting them to set-up Two-Face for the next movie. But Nolan probably felt that the transformation of Dent from hero to monster was key to the whole thing...

Now, how are they going to fit a gritty, real, Robin into this Bat-verse?

Hopefully not at all.

Maybe it's just me, but I can't see how the Penguin can play in any half-way realistic scenario. Goes for a lot of Bat-villains, which may limit how far this series can go.

this is definitely OTM - altho I thought Burton did a great job with DeVito in Batman Returns.

and yes plz no Robin

I think someone mentioned it before, but maybe they go the precocious-youth-gone-wild route, and make the potential Robin into an unwanted follower / acolyte (like the dudes in the hockey gear in TDK) that Bats decides to either set straight or actually train (for whatever reason --likes the cut of his jib / wants to get some booty)?

And then you cast Shia LeBouef. :p

But Nolan probably felt that the transformation of Dent from hero to monster was key to the whole thing...

He's said that he wanted to make this film stand on its own after thinking about going a more-than-one-movie arc, and I'd say he's aware that it's a bit of a squash. Even so, and especially with my rewatch last night (having that entire closing scene film for IMAX makes it incredibly operatic), there's a power to it that is starting to gel for me -- thinking especially of the utterly grotesque moment when Dent talks about what is fair, barking the line and making his disfigured side of his face seem all that much more monstrously alien.

And then you cast Shia LeBouef. :p

And his specially trained batmonkeys on vines.

Bats decides to either set straight or actually train (for whatever reason --likes the cut of his jib / wants to get some booty)

Might be able to tie it in with his argument about wanting to give up the job and feeling that, post-Rachel/Dent/Joker, there's no way it can be fully given up.

And then there's the booty, yes.

With Robin, you could do all that, and even make the gay subtext overt, but the costume everyone recognises is still ridiculous, and he's drawing down the power of . . a seasonal songbird.

Batman and Ratman

Maybe it's just me, but I can't see how the Penguin can play in any half-way realistic scenario. Goes for a lot of Bat-villains, which may limit how far this series can go.

-- Soukesian, Thursday, 31 July 2008 15:39 (4 minutes ago) Link

I agree. I think they've sort of hit the wall for Batman as social commentary/crime drama with this one. Like I said when I suggested a Man-Bat/Catwoman/Killer Croc/Hugo Strange plot, it would be a massive shift in tone.

-- Oilyrags, Thursday, 31 July 2008 15:41 (2 minutes ago) Link

you realize we're talking about a movie where a billionaire dresses up like a bat and seriously calls himself batman

catwoman would be the logical next step. there's so much sexual tension to be exploited in that pairing.

you realize we're talking about a movie where a billionaire dresses up like a bat and seriously calls himself batman

All part of the joy.

Will Halle get a second chance?

xpost

Catwoman seems like a logical choice (esp now w/Dawes dead)

but what about BATZARRO lolz

I'm in favour of Catwoman - it would be great if it was a relatively small-scale ninety minuter just focusing on the weird relationship between the two characters.

maybe catwoman as fellow vigilante minus the "rules" batman assigns to himself? could work...

otoh consider the villains they've already run through - Ras Al Ghul and the Scarecrow were not really obvious villain choices for the first one - its possible they could do something interesting with one of the more minor ones without veering into completely unbelievable superpower territory

Shoot forward in time a few years to make Gordon's kids a little older and go the Batgirl route?

Definitely out: Clayface, Killer Croc. Most other villains could be reworked without too much difficulty into a pseudo-realistic framework.

clayface is the only monstrous sfx villain i can see working in this - get ron perlman back

^^^yeah I can see Clayface working actually and he's one of my favorites but seems kinda like a long-shot

maybe catwoman as fellow vigilante minus the "rules" batman assigns to himself? could work...

Before DC fucked it up, they set up Catwoman as the self-proclaimed protector of a slummy section of Gotham, occasionally banging heads with Dick Tracy-ish crime folks, and also engaging in a little theft now & then (for the thrill of it).

Yeah, A Cooke-inspired Catwoman could be really fun, but again it wouldn't fit the whole 'I AM THINKING VERY SERIOUSLY ABOUT POWER AND FEAR' deal that Nolan has set up.

was Karl Rove a villain in the comics? What's his origin?

A Cooke-inspired Catwoman could be really fun, but again it wouldn't fit the whole 'I AM THINKING VERY SERIOUSLY ABOUT POWER AND FEAR' deal that Nolan has set up.

Seriously? For me, that version of Catwoman & Gotham Central are the closest the funny books have come to the feel & tenor of the Nolan flicks.

that reminds me - the whole subplot about the weaselly guy revealing Batman's identity, that was totally unnecessary. Other unnecessary things that should've been cut:

- super-CSI sequence where Batman contaminates the crime scene to recreate the ballistics from that shell in the wall (what exactly was the point of that anyway?)
- opening bit with the drug deal and the pseudo-Batmen

point of ballistics was supposedly to get fingerprints off the shattered bullet, but then if he was leaving fingerprints on bullets why not elsewhere? unless he loaded the gun at home before he put his gloves on (did he even generally wear gloves i can't even remember?!)

supposedly this gave batman a name for the joker (thomas schwinn? schmidt?) but then later gordon (i think) said "we have no idea who this guy is!" so yeah wtf really i dunno.

Eh, who says it was the Joker who loaded the gun? (Melvin White was the name of the guy with said apartment.)