That sentence, on its own? :bowdown: Absolute poetry. I may have to steal it from you.

I'm not sure if this has been brought up before, but Spoiler: has it passed through anyone's mind that Two-face may not be dead? We never really saw him die, and all Gordon said at the press briefing was that "Harvey Dent, Gotham's White Knight, was dead". I know I'm going out on a limb here, but I think they may be pulling something here as I can't really remember seeing a coffin for him

Church, I totally agree, thats one big talking point Dave and I had after the movie Spoiler: we both agree he's not really dead

I don't really think the sonar was all that ridiculous. Sonar itself has been around for decades, and I don't think it would be much of a stretch to make a pocket-sized version and then network a whole bunch of them together. Perhaps they overdid the presentation of it, but it really didn't take anything away from the movie for me.

I was curious about that, too... and I don't really have an answer because either would have been equally plausible.

Spoiler: I think that they kept things open-ended like that on purpose because they haven't yet decided which direction to take the next movie.

After all, they hid the fact that Harvey became disfigured/killed those people from the public to preserve the hero image of him. So to me, the fact that they publicly declared him deceased doesn't mean he really is dead.

As a side note, what bugged me most about the movie was Two-Face's disfigured side. Most of it was badly charred, which doesn't make much sense since he was only on fire for a couple seconds. If you get past that and accept that he was burned that badly, what about the critical parts that remained fully intact (like his eyeball, jaw muscles, teeth)?

My guess is that they initially planned for his face to be "melted" by the liquid when he tipped over his chair and knocked over the barrel, but couldn't do that and still get a PG-13 rating... so they changed it mid-production.

Spoiler: I'm pretty sure Two-Face is dead. It even says in the novelization he's dead, and I think that's fine. It was a tragic story about a man trying to save Gotham and, despite his best efforts, failing.

Very awesome movie. It wasn't really a comic book movie...it was more than that. Chris Nolan really knows what he's doing. The action sequences in TDK were just mesmerizing. Lots of audible gasps from people in the theater during the Harvey Dent escort scene. I know it's been said a hundred times but Heath Ledger's death really put a bittersweet edge to the Joker's scenes...such acting perfection and he will never get to experience what the world thought of it.

I'm not sure I'd agree. Spoiler: They did say that Gordon was dead, and we even saw a coffin. Yet there he was at the end of the movie.

I really want to see it a second time. It's the best comic book based movie I've ever seen and really I can see it finding a place in my top ten of all time.

Spoiler: the joker's "magic trick" was fucking classic.

Anyone else think it was weird Anthony Michael Hall had such a tiny part in the movie?

This movie is like a dream come true for movie lovers--not just comic book movies. I'm left in awe and a euphoric feeling after the movie, like I've been touched by an angel. What a great way to end the night.

And +1 for not casting Katie Holmes. I thought she was annoying in the first one.

My favorite movie of all time!

I didn't mind the voice thing at all. I liked it actually. It really separated Bruce Wayne from Batman in my mind.

I loved Aaron Eckhart as Harvey Dent. I think he played that whole role very well.

And the Joker..... I can't say a whole lot that hasn't been said, but he took that movie from great to incredible. He was just so dark and twisted, as he should be in my opinion. Throughout the movie I kept thinking how fitting it would be for someone to stand up dressed as the Joker at the end of the movie and kill us all!

I would've died a happy man!:p

While I loved the movie, I did not come out of the movie with a feeling of euphoria even in the slightest. I almost cried during the credits. Not because I was necessarily sad, per se, but rather because of how emotionally draining the entire experience had been. It was a wild ride, but a very heavy one, and the end is a real downer to boot. I've talked to a few other friends who felt the same way. I'm surprised you ended up feeling so energized by the end!

Spoiler: We never saw Gordon in a coffin. We saw his "death" and then his return, nothing else was really said or done beside a few "Gordon's gone, Rachel!" moments. Plus, he had ample opportunity there to fake his own death, whereas Dent was suffering from half a face and a rather bad fall. Some say Batman can survive and therefore so can Dent, but Batman can survive a fall of twenty some odd stories and live, whereas Dent has no help from any fancy gadgets or armor.

I think, given the world we're talking about, that Dent could very much be alive and, well, I guess not well, but maybe alive. There's still plenty of meat on that bone. The ending wasn't quite tidy enough for me to write him off completely.

Heck, I wouldn't be horribly upset or surprised if Ras showed up sometime in the future, either.

Though, he's technically not mortal, so I guess that's a little different.

Wasn't it explained that Ra's Al Ghul is a name given down through the centuries rather than a single person?

Hehe, I watched it in the comfort of my car in a drive-in theater. I had a lovely lady friend with me to keep me company...(and her brothers in the back). Then they showed Wall-E afterward, which is another treat as well. But it was very, very light stuff so I think that helped.

no, Ra's al Ghul has Lazerus Pits that keep him immortal. He has lived for hundreds of years.

Ra's al Ghul - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I thought it was pretty good, but I'm not as frothing at the mouth at it as the majority of people that have seen it.

I, of course, thought Ledger did well, but I am a really big fan of the mythos that the Burton film created in that the Jack Napier killed Bruce Wayne's parents, thus "creating" Batman, and Batman pushed Napier into the chemical vat, thus "creating" Joker. It gave the story a more yin-yang feel and gave Joker more of a reason to have a hardon of hate for the Bat, rather than just being some random disfigured loony.

Spoiler: I also thought that the cellphone-sonar computer might have been leading into something resembling the Brother Eye/OMAC storyline, but I guess not

Something sort of as an aside that I find kind of interesting is that many people (including people here) loved Die Hard 4, despite John McClanes newfound superhuman abilities. Many of the same people loved Wanted, which was filled with similar suspenion of disbelief. And yet Batman gets his ass kicked several times in this movie, and people seem to love it because it makes him more "human" and "believable". Wierd.

I'm a nerd. I know that. I'm talking about the Nolan-verse.

I just saw the movie tonight, and holy crap was it awesome. I think Ledger deserves an Academy Ward for his performance. He played the part perfectly. The idea of the joker is not that he has a hatred for Batman, but that he is the incarnation of pure evil pitted in the immortal struggle against Batman, who is the guardian of justice and morality and good. It is better that he doesn't have a backstory, and that he just exists, for it makes him far more sinister. Plus it's how the comics portray him.

I also thought the score was magnificent. It meshed so well with the images onscreen. Zimmer too deserves an Academy Award.

Ah. :)

Ah but that's the conflict eh? Batman is NOT decidedly good, moral or just. I don't think even he knows. That's his inner demon and struggle. Which is why the Harvey Dent addition made the triangle complete. Batman saw Dent as the answer that Gotham needed at the moment and for the future. A true "white night" of sorts (cf. with Dark Knight). That's why the twist of Harvey Dent turning into Two Face is such a tragedy.

By the way, I saw TDK for a third time today. Who thinks I can turn that into a ten?

Yes, but he's incorruptible. He refuses to kill, as that lowers him down to the Joker's level. He fights for what is right and just in Gotham, not for anarchy and chaos. Dent was the man, while Batman was the symbol. Dent was the man who could walk in the daylight and do the things that Batman could never do, like show his face and rally the people around him.

Fuck ten, RG. Go for broke. Make it fifty.

Definetly the best batman movie so far. My only real complaints are that the dialogue kinda dragged on at parts and we didn't get to see enough of Joker.

I've stayed out of this thread until now, as pregnant wives are not conducive to midnight showings, I *was* going to see this at Imax, and the two times we tried there before today they were full and/or sold out.

Dr. Crane called him that in BB
-----Added 22/7/2008 at 08 : 59 : 19-----
My wife didn't know it was PG13 until I told her and she remembered "oh yeah, I guess they never really SHOWED anything"...I look forward to the fairly obviously telegraphed Unrated director's cut. :thumbsup:
-----Added 22/7/2008 at 09 : 05 : 46-----
I agree wholeheartedly with both of these things.

Spoiler: As far as I could see, with one possible exception, the Joker played by his own rules as stated. Plus, blowing themselves up wouldn't have mindfucked anyone, whereas blowing the other boat would have left a boatfull of 400+ guilty consciences. He was encouraging selfishness, not punishing it.

I had one major question for someone who was paying more attention: Spoiler: Was Joker honest about the locations of Rachel and Dent, or did he switch the addresses? I thought Batman was going to Rachel. I agree that making him choose and then reversing his choice is a very Jokerish thing to do, but it seems inconsistent with the rest of his actions. Did I just mix up the addresses?

Most of the film I found amusing and interesting, but it tended to drag every once and awhile. Bale's voice annoyed me, but the Dent story line was incredible... and holy Heath Ledger Batman. The nuances within his role... the choices he made physically at times made me shake. There is a moment where his whole emotional state switches from complete bliss to suffer and rage, back to complete bliss... in a millisecond! The choices he made vocally, physically (especially physically)... I haven't seen a performance like that in so long. I can't even imagine getting to that place; legendary. Oscar.

Eckhart really surprised me; not that I expected crap, but his character was written so well. Tremendous. I retract the dragging comment. The more I talk about it, the more I gush. Jesus, I could do this all night. I've been trying to get that nasal sound for days now. Fucking Heath Ledger. You were so good. Damn it.

Spoiler: This is what begged the question about the Joker fucking with people, because he DID lie about the locations. Batman 100% believed he was going after Rachel and sending Gordon, etc. after Dent. He didn't give two fucks if Dent made it if he could rescue Rachel. Ok, maybe he cared a little, but not enough to sacrifice her for it.

That was the beauty of the Joker in this movie. He didn't just leave you with an impossible choice, he made it impossible for you to know if the choice you were making was even the one you meant to make, which is why I think it's a valid question about who would have been blown up. Personally, I think they're equally likely, and I'm kind of glad we didn't find out.

To add on, Spoiler: I don't think his goal was to kill Dent at all. Whether or not Rachel was suppose to die, I don't know (but probably so). I think his goal was to keep Dent alive for the specific purpose of showing Gotham and Batman that even the best people can be turned into a villain. They talked about this in the end when Batman was saying that the Joker can't win. If Gotham saw their hero turn bad, then there is no more hope for the city, etc. etc.

I'm inclined to think that was a plan developed after Spoiler: Rachel died and Dent was hideously scarred. I think the Joker would've been happy to have either or both die and made his next plan after he knew the result of that one.

That doesn't really make sense. Spoiler: Joker wanted Dent to snap. This required the death of Rachel, and required Batman to be blamed for it. Besides Dent's death and the coverup, everything went according to the Joker's plans perfectly.

I just don't see how he could have reliably predicted that Batman would get there on time to save the one but that the cops would be too slow to get the other. I think it's a bit tenuous, but I guess who knows.

Batman breaks the rules of the road and has a ridiculous motorcycle. The cops have crown vics. Also, Dent may have been a tiny bit closer.

it's a great movie, but one actor of the Dark Night is dead

Bingo.

Spoiler: And the only way to pull that off is if he switches the addresses. He knows Batman cares for her because of what happened at Dent's fundraising party, so he knows he'll go after Rachel first.

I think that switch is pretty obvious, but do you think he switched the ferry detonators, too? So instead of blowing up the other boat, it really blows up the boat that the detonator is on. I'm having trouble figuring that one out.

BTW - is it really necessary to continue with the spoiler tags?

No, I don't think so. And I just assumed that about the detonators and that the prisoners wouldn't use it.

Spoiler tags are fun! :thumbsup:

Anyhoo, I hope they show alternative scene when the DVD comes out. That is, Spoiler: the boats actually explode. That shit would really piss Batman off and he would be more inclined to kill the Joker...which he will have to fight the temptation of doing so. Is that too much to ask?

i stand by my previous statement that no, he has no possible motivation to switch detonators. It would be very un-joker-like.

Here's the two possible scenarios:
Spoiler: Scenario 1: Detonators switched, somebody hits it. You are left with one relieved boat of innocent people and one boat of dead attempted murderers.

Scenario 2: Detonators are not switched, somebody hits it. You are left with a blown up boat of 'innocent' people (innocent being, decided to not hit the switch) and a boat of one murderer and 400 accomplices who have to live with their decision to kill 400 people. Which is more Jokerly? Which introduces more anarchy and chaos into society?

I still don't even see why people think it would be a 'twist' to have them switched...the Joker does not seek justice or to punish wrongdoing, and it would totally spoil the joke.

Amazing, amazing movie. The "Batvoice" didn't really bother me at all like it did in Batman Begins. Heath Ledger did a fucking outstanding job as The Joker. Definitely going to be a Blu-Ray purchase once I get a PS3.

"Let's put a smile on that face!"