The Dark Knight (Spoilers!)
 

TM and I just saw a midnight showing. Amazing movie. Our local AMC Forum 30 sold out all 29 shows at 12:01. It was insanity! Great movie... I'll post more tmw (no spoilers)

I'm far too tired to do anymore writing, so I'll just copy and paste my review and wait for the discussions to begin:

Roger Ebert says it's possibly the best comic book movie ever made and that this movie transcends what comic book movies are. I will be seeing it this Sunday. The first one is tied for my "best comic book movie" status so I'm already a huge fan.

You guys know about World of Warcraft eh?

So the new classes name is "Death Knight" and someone is telling me there is a scene where they discuss something about the Unstoppable Force vs The Immovable Object.

can anyone confirm this quip/random coincidence? also, the NDA and beta invites started going out for this today.

such craziness /paranoia

I'm seeing this tonight!

It's going to be insane. All tickets for the entire day have beens sold out. We'll have to be in line an hour before it starts.

I didn't see the last few Batman movies (I think the one with Catwoman was the last one I saw). Can I jump in now, or do I really need to track down the last one (whatever the title was) first?

The last one, Batman Begins, was the first of this new era of Batman movies, starring Christian Bale and directed by Christopher Nolan. They are such a departure from ANY of the previous movies, that I highly recommend watching Batman Begins before watching The Dark Knight. I do, however, recommend watching BOTH this weekend!

They really are that much better. Akin to what Lasereth quoted Roger Ebert saying, Batman Begins was my favorite (and one of very few that I liked) comic movie adaptations. This one was even better... I'd say by a factor of at least 5.

Yes, the death knight... yes, this quip is made. I don't think that WoW was a motivating factor for it though. The further illumination made about that quote in the movie is far too sensible to have been a "toss in".

Consider yourself lucky.

Yes. You must watch Batman Begins before seeing the new one. Not that you won't understand the plot and characters of the new one without it, but it'll help immerse you in the world.

However, do NOT bother watching any more of the previous generation of Batman films directed by Joel Schumacher. The ones with George Clooney and Val Kilmer are pretty much write-offs. They are failed attempts at marketing to 11 year olds.

That's a good description. I can't imagine people not liking it.

Just got back from seeing this.... absolutely amazing. Loved it! :D

Heath Ledger gave such a fantastic performance, I can't imagine anyone being able to replace him.

Me, too. It was a stunning total package.

Regarding Heath Ledger, I have to ask this ...

Did anyone else fall absolutely in love with his character here? He manages to give The Joker this ever-so-slight vulnerability. I think I have this strange new fantasy. :crazy:

And when did they start calling him The Batman? I don't recall that from Batman Begins.

That movie left me reeling. I was quite prepared to be impressed, but not overwhelmed, after all the hype. Sometimes things that ought to be incredible just aren't. This was not one of those things.

As RG noted above, the Bale "Batman Voice" is a little...odd...but I don't think I have any complaints other than that. The movie was absolutely riveting from the first moment to the last. Well-written, well-directed, well-acted.

And it had that oh so rare ability to be a story whose ending I couldn't predict. Not in the whodunit sort of way, but rather the question of "when does this story end?" It means that the movie is great because there is no ending to the story. These characters, and their respective plights, feel persistent. You can't put a neat bow on the end of the movie. There's no happily or unhappily ever after. The characters survived (those who did) this particular ordeal, but their lives and struggles go on even though we're not there to watch it. At least for me, that is what separates a truly amazing entertainment experience from one which is great or good.

In a shameless plug, that's one of the reasons I like "Mad Men" so much. The exact plot arc is less important than watching the characters maneuvering around the conflicts in their lives, so when it ends, it doesn't have to be complete or neat. The Dark Knight captured this element perfectly. It could've ended before or after it did, and not made enormous difference in how I felt about the movie, because that wasn't what kept me riveted to the screen.

It wasn't what I expected, but it was much more than I would've hoped.

And uh, don't bring your kids if they are only age appropriate for Spider Man or Iron Man or even Batman Begins. This movie isn't for them. Not to get into a discussion of movie ratings, but the PG-13 is purely for bottom line purposes. This movie is dark, scary, unrelenting and haunting.

This was the best movie I have seen in recent recollection. The only two parts I did not care for have already been stated: the sonar and bale's batman voice. Ledger was perfection as the Joker.

jewels, I didn't detect any vulnerability in him. It was more of the Joker just being the Joker to me. That's just the way he is.

I generally don't go for internet speak, but OMG this film gave me chills. It is hands down the best Batman film ever made and perhaps the best comic book film as well.

An amazing cast from top to bottom. While Bail, Caine, Eckhart, Freeman and all the others put forth strong roles, the shining star is Ledger. Simply put, Ledger stole the show as Joker and put Nicholson's 80s version to shame.

For anyone that is even a remote fan of Batman I suggest you go see this film asap.

I think that's how he's referred to in the comics by Joker, that and as Bats.

RE: Comparing various portrayals of the Joker, I don't know that it's fair to say Ledger put Nicholson's version to shame. I have zero doubt that if you'd asked him to play Joker like Ledger played him, Nicholson would do an outstanding job, but that's not the Joker he was asked to play. They're two very different and equally iconic portrayals of the same character and i think a preference between them is merely that, preference.

My personal problem with the Burton Batmans is Michael Keaton, who I simply can't take seriously. He's just a goofy-looking guy and I can't make that goofiness into a badass superhero. But you'll never see me argue with the Joker's GIANT revolver, frozen-smile killer make up or "Have you ever danced with the Devil in the pale moon light?" That shit, in the context of Burton's Gotham, is priceless.

True. I was able to rationalize it in my mind by thinking he didn't want the public to recognize Bruce Wayne's voice. ;)


That explains it. Haven't read any comic books since I was a kid. Thank you!

I dunno. I kinda think that "I don't want to kill you. You complete me," is pretty freakin' awesome.

Technically, he was "The Batman" first, but later that was simplified to simply "Batman". Almost everyone in both new movies call him The Batman, too.

Erm, my point was that they're both awesome, but in very different ways, and I'm glad both versions exist for me to enjoy, when my mood suits the noir/realistic or the gothic/hyperbolic.

Good movie. Definitely too long. About 30 minutes too long. Acting was superb all around. Maggie Gyllenhal was definitely the weak link. She also wasn't attractive enough to be the love interest. While Heath Ledger was good, I don't think he's irreplaceable. Remember, people said the same thing about Jack Nicholson's Joker. Maybe some future actor portraying the Joker will put Heath Ledger to "shame". Morgan Freeman is awesome as always, Aaron Eckhart, Gary Oldman, all great. Definitely not for kids.

Went to the 10:15 show last night. ZOMG. The movie was all kinds of awesome. To give you an idea of how awesome it was, in a packed auditorium of 300+ people, nobody has ever checked their cell phone or talked.

The movie was absolutely intense. I plan on seeing it in the IMAX next time.

I agree, if my friend was drunk and hitting on her in a bar I'd do the friendly thing and drag his ass away. Yet Bruce Wayne is supposed to be in love with her? Please.

I think Maggie's gorgeous.

I agree.
She's interesting. She brought a lot more to the role than Katie Holmes did. Who is Bruce Wayne supposed to be in love with? A stereotypical supermodel?

I think she's attractive in kind of an atypical indy sort of way. She looked really good in Strange Than Fiction, for example. She doesn't really cut it when she's up next to Christian Bale and Aaron Eckhart, who are very traditionally attractive. I agree that it was something of an odd juxtaposition and she didn't quite fit in. She did do an interesting job of channeling what Katie Holmes had already done with the character, though. It was curious to see Maggie playing Katie playing Rachel Dawes.

Spoiler: That being said, I do not think it is in any way a loss to the series that they killed her off. Between the change in actress and the general fact that the character wasn't all that compelling, I'm not going to spend much time worrying about it.

More interesting, I think, is whether or not Dent actually died and who, if anyone, could replace Ledger as Nolan's very much unresolved Joker. I can't tell you how much I would love to see the Joker return, if only so we could have Harley Quinn show up as his corruptible doctor at Arkham. Is that so much to ask?

In a word, yes, the negative implications of your diction aside. He's an absurdly wealthy, young, attractive billionaire played by one of the most attractive young actors of our era. The "matching principle" in my brain says that he should be with with the most attractive girl possible. And while she's certainly attractive, she's also certainly not making my top list. Katie Holmes is by far a weaker actress, but she has the "girl next door grows up beautiful" look pretty much locked down. I preferred Gyllenhal in the role, but Holmes looked the part.

I don't see how my diction has negative implications. If you are referring to my "stereotypical supermodel" statement, the suggestion of a "stereotypical supermodel" was meant to highlight the focus on attractiveness alone evident in previous posts. I don't think that the only alternative is to Gyllenhaal is a supermodel.

Regarding the believability of Bruce Wayne being interested in Maggie Gyllenhaal's character, I suppose it's a silly argument, but:
1) Bruce Wayne is strange, distant, and emotionally unstable. (He has issues).
2) Bruce Wayne doesn't fit the mold of the stereotypical "absurdly wealthy, young, attractive, attractive billionaire". If he did, he wouldn't be much of a superhero.
3) There is more to mate value than physical attractiveness. Especially when considering a long-term partner.

I find Gyllenhaal believable in her role. I think that more than Katie Holmes, she was able to portray someone with intelligence, strength, and maturity. She fits the role better than Katie Holmes did. Katie Holmes wasn't believable as a district attorney. I don't see Gyllenhaal as a weak link. Perhaps the character could have been better written. If there was a problem with the movie, I think that it was too little time spent on Aaron Eckhart's character.

Good point. When you look at the history of the comic book, the artificial Wayne often dates supermodels but he only has feelings for intelligent and often complex women.

Who do you suppose he loved more?
Gorgeous, somewhat shallow photojournalist?
http://www.solarnavigator.net/films_..._bassinger.jpg
Anti-social militant feminist vigilante?
http://www.turgentesdeficcion.org/wp...erCatwoman.jpg

Yes. Bruce Wayne is publicly a playboy. He dates supermodels, but he doesn't fall in love with them.

I think that the major flaw in this movie (and all superhero movies) is the notion that the cure to society's ills is a single man. This is alluded to in the movie and has been explicitly mentioned by Nolan.

"Stereotypical supermodel" carries a lot of baggage as a phrase, but yes, I'm being picky.

I understand that having her be perfect isn't a great match because he's not perfect either, I just think they could have gone with a different actress who could have brought similar warmth and character to the role but who looked more like, well, Katie Holmes, if only she could act her way out of a paper bag.

Obviously it's a topic change, but isn't that an integral part of the fantasy of the super hero? That someone could come along and make everything better? I don't think it's supposed to be realistic, but it seems a fairly entrenched trait in human society to look for a hero to take care of our problems. Do you think these movies are feeding into that trait which you'd rather see downplayed or eradicated? Guess there is something to be said for forcing everyone to realize that they're in control, and that if they want things to improve, they have to do it themselves instead of waiting for someone else to come along and fix it.

At least Batman is doing a better job than Captain Hammer. Jerk.

P.S. Michelle Pfiefer as Catwoman may have been one of my first adolescent fantasies. I wonder if she's responsible for my latex and leather fetish. Probably.

Batman is less a superhero and more a vigilante. The fantasy is about breaking down the walls of restraint and acting without societal limitations, while still maintaining morality. It's not about bedding beautiful women. We've got James Bond for that.

Sorry, I wasn't clear, my "that" was to Sapien's statement:

Rather than the fantasy of being a superhero and nailing hot chicks, which a superhero has problems doing because of the whole secret identity thing.

Interesting questions! Yes, I do think the "single man" solution is an integral part of the superhero genre. I also agree that the perspective seems to be fairly entrenched in society. I'm reminded of an essay I read along time ago about Rosa Parks:
This is a topic for another thread. I do think that the superhero genre misrepresents paths to social change. That said, I liked the movie, I like superhero movies, and I don't fault superhero movies for their portrayal of a superhero solution to the world's problems.

I can't add more. Ledger's portrayal of the Joker was superb, a master at turning people into the monsters, he only being the agent of chaos.

Gotta disagree on this. I think she was much better than Holmes, in my opinion isn't saying much, but personally I think she is much better looking.

And holy crap, that was Cillian Murphy back as Scare Crow.

Nothing I can say will describe how I feel about this movie better than this: THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!! JESUS GOD THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This movie had so much good in it, it's ridiculous. Harvey Dent = awesome, Joker = awesome, action sequences = awesome, Christian Bale = awesome, it just goes on and on!!!

First off, Onodrim, I looked for you! :D

I loved this movie. I've gotten bored and/or dozed off and zoned out dueing every movie I've seen in recent months. Including Rambo, the Conans, the Hulk, Iron Man and Redbelt. I was wide-freakin' awake for this one. My favorite was learning how to make a pencil disappear. Perfectly executed dark humor. But the Bat-voice just sucks. He needs his nose unplugged.

I wondered if anyone else caught that.

Ok so I dont really like comic movies, but I did really dig the last Batman (MUCH more than all the others). Y'all need to understand that the Joker is Dave's most favorite character in anything ever...god help me all the bookcase space thats devoted to him, so ever since the ending of the last Batman....he's been jonesing for this badly.

He's been like a kid at christmas all week and we'd long decided our viewing would be the first show on Sunday to hopefully not be in such a crowded theater.

Theater crowd was good, a little more than 1/4 full.

This movie was good (no way am I putting it in the "best ever" category, but as far as comic book movies I will put it as the best) and Heath was fantastic. Dave says he was SO much the joker from the Killing Joke and it impressed him greatly and that he'd built this movie up so much in his head he was really glad it surpassed that.

I enjoyed it....I thought there should have been way more Joker and less Harvey Dent though...oh and more Morgan Freeman

I think my favorite part was Spoiler: The Joker dressed in the nurses uniform walking away from the hospital and the 2nd detonation of the bomb oh and the "you complete me" line was great..."I wish I knew how to quit you" would have been classic as well lol

I'll give the movie a 10/10 but its still not the best movie ever....cant be here was no Alan Rickman ha ha ha

That's a very long-standing idea in the batman universe. Kind of like a one can't survive without the other type deal.

I can not wait to see this one! But unfortunately I am up in the boonies for another week :(

I am all ready to go though. I will be getting someone in the city to buy me tickets for the Sunday showing on the IMAX screen, I can't wait!!!

A fantastic movie. 10/10

Spoiler: I love how it kept taking away the feeling of hope in humanity over and over.

I didn't love the movie as much as you guys. The Joker was great but I don't think Harvey Dent's turn was played very well. The action was dark and edited poorly. The dialog was great, especially the Joker's. As was mentioned before, The sonar was kinda silly and didn't really fit into the more realistic feel of the rest of the movie. I like the movie because it didn't feel like a super hero movie. It was very easy to suspend disbelief and accept everything that was going on.

One thing I wonder,Spoiler: If the people on the ferry decided to use the trigger, you think the other boat would have blown or their own?

A couple of Box Office records: 'Dark Knight' sets opening weekend box office record - CNN.com. Not too shabby!

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!"

I guess I missed where you talked about that earlier in the thread. Thanks for clarifying again... I definitely agree with your thinking.

I avoided this thread until I'd seen the movie, which I've just done. I'm not doing spoiler tags--anyone who doesn't want to be spoiled shouldn't be in here. If you don't want to be spoiled, quit reading this post NOW.

Regarding the "did Joker set up Dent's fall" question: I think that's answered for us by Joker himself at Harvey's bedside. He's not a schemer. He'll set up scenarios like the ferries, but big, elaborate setups aren't his gig. The most complex we got in the movie was allowing himself to get caught so he could get into police HQ. The simultaneous triple-murder of the comissioner, the judge, and the DA took planning for sure, but it was a one-step deal. Anything longer than that, and he's an improviser, highly skilled at turning the current circumstances to his own advantage. He's a few steps ahead of everyone else, but he hasn't usually set things up, which is what lets Batman get him every time. And he certainly couldn't have foreseen Dent's injury, which is a critical part of turning him. In Two-Face cannon, he's burned by acid thrown by Sal Maroni after a decisive win against him in the courtroom, and it's the pain of his injury and the torment of his disfigurement that turns him into a villain. They motivated it a bit better than simple vanity in the film, but the pain from his burns is certainly part of his descent.

The "Bat Voice" bothered me. He needed to get Lucius to work up some Bat Cough Drops or some Bat Lemon Tea or something.

I'll differ from the popular position and say I thought the sonar thing was super cool. Also, if I ever wreck my car, I want it to dump me out of it in a motorcycle version of itself. Bad ass.

Here's what broke my brain the whole movie: Gotham is Chicago. Looks like Chicago. Feels like Chicago. Scattered with Chicago landmarks. The buildings from the cover of the Wilco album Yankee Hotel Foxtrot are visible in the background out Wayne's penthouse windows. Hell, the hotel I stayed at last weekend was just barely out of frame in a couple shots. Yet every street address they spoke was a Manhattan address. Dent was hidden way up on the upper West side, and Rachel was out in Brooklyn. But, you know, Brooklyn, Chicago.

Where IS Gotham supposed to be? I always assumed it was meant to be NYC. Also, Gotham got reset back to current times, after the last movie. Gotham was all steampunk-futuristic last time around, and although we have story continuity, the city itself has regressed.

Gotham is supposed to be NYC-esque, with islands and such, but I'm not sure if Nolan's Gotham is on an ocean or just by large rivers. Gotham-Chicago took some getting used to for me, but I don't think about it anymore. It's just Gotham.

I think Joker wanted it to be Batman's fall, but settled for Dent to hurt Batman.

The comics sort of had a back story, like the movie did, where he makes it up as he goes.
http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/9...ge22jt9.th.jpg
http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/6...ge23hz8.th.jpg
She wasn't looking her best, and camera angles can only do so much to hide the fact that she was either more or less pregnant every few scenes.

You guys should listen to this great interview with screenwriter Jonah Nolan on writing TDK. It gives great insight to the story and just gives the film that much more depth.

They also discuss Harvey/Two-Face's fate (whether he died or not) although it's to note that Nolan doesn't really confirm his death and is very ambiguous about it.

Creative Screenwriting interview with Jonah Nolan (mp3): http://media.libsyn.com/media/creati...nightQandA.mp3

Am I the only one who like Holmes better than Gyllenhal? I didn't buy (at all) that Maggie was a lifelong friend of Bruce. She was also very cold in her scene with Alfred.
-----Added 26/7/2008 at 01 : 50 : 03-----
I was also sorta bothered by the fact that Gotham went from Chicago+CGI to just Chicago. All the new buildings/islands were gone, the multi-level el train system was gone. Seemed like a strange change in aesthetic

I finally saw this last night...

I agree with Ratbastid that Joker didn't plan on Dent's downfall. It was just something that happened along the way that he was able to capitalize upon.

I also like to think that Dent is dead. The reason being that Dent *was* a very stand up guy. He did the right thing. I find it hard to believe that his lapse into the mind set of Two Face would last. Eventually, he would come to his senses and regret his actions. Dying as he did, without the opportunity of remorse is all the more tragic. More tragic = more better.

I also agree that killing Rachel was essential to the larger story arch (i.e. beyond this film). Batman should not have romantic attachments. It's much better that he has one that died, perhaps because of his actions, so to better drive him forward. Romantic attachments do not allow him to do what needs to be done.

More than that, I didn't really have much of a problem with Holmes in Begins. Yeah, there were a couple scenes that even I recognized as bad acting ("your father would be ashamed" comes to mind), but mostly I though she had a good demeanor for a childhood friend of the dark knight and prosecutor for the dark city.

Gyllenhal was waaaay too bubbly and cheerful.

Saw it Sunday night, 10:10 Imax. AMAZING!! Especially the beginning wide shot of the city, almost gave me vertigo.

I hate to be cheesy and describe TDK as being "grittier, darker," etc, but it really is. I kept forgetting it was a PG-13 movie, which is a GOOD thing. I felt Ledger outshined everyone else. The complexity of the character, critiquing and criticizing humanity through that big smile of his, just made this movie so much more. And a master of slight-of-hand, too!
What I loved about TDK was that it did't try to make Batman cool. Yes, they gave him new gadgets, new suit, awesome wings etc. For me, every superhero movie has banked on everybody wanting to be that hero. By the end of TDK, you honestly feel like this is a burden for one man, and all the crazy gizmos won't make it better. Spidey may have said "This is my destiny, this is my curse..." but you really feel that in TDK. The ending speech summed up the character of Batman perfectly.

I was mostly bothered by the PG-13 editing. The movie itself was great, but the quick cuts to avoid showing gore were SO obvious.

I can't wait for the DVD to come out so we can see what it looked like without those cuts, because, yeah, that was pretty fucking stupid.

I have a picture from a cinematography magazine showing a burning pile of money with a burning body on top of it. That footage exists, and will 100% be released in an 'uncut directors edition'

Also, the amount of practical effects done in this movie blew my mind. The semi truck flip was done full scale with a stunt driver :eek:

Most of the "batman stares into the city and ponders it from the top of a tall building" shots were actually done with Christian Bale standing on top of a tower.

They actually blew up Spoiler: a candy factory dolled up to look like a hospital

Finally, got back from seeing this in a full house too.
This movie is just exceeding so many expectations its amazing and a fitting testament to everyone who has been involved in bringing all of this together.
I've always been disappointed with what I look apon as the Hollywood machine which exists only to fill seats and make more money.
Yet, sitting through this film you could see the passion and carefully crafted work that has gone into this fine piece of work.

While, some minor things like the 'BATVOICE' did seem a little unnecessary, they far outweigh everything that is good in this movie.

Heath Ledger's performance without a doubt will go down in the annuals of memorable characters ever played. I could go on about this topic but everyone here seems to have alot of the angles already covered too.

I noticed the quick cuts also, but my take on why they did that is different. A lot of the quick cuts involved The Joker. I am thinking maybe Heath died before they got all the footage how they really wanted it to be.

Also I think that Maggie is way too unattractive to play the love interest of two very powerful men. She does very poorly in close up shots of her pig nose.

At this point, do we really need spoilers anymore? If you haven't seen it, why are your reading this thread?


I want to go on record as saying I'm 100% sure that Two-face isn't dead.
It seemed to me that her death showed him how dangerous it could be to fall in love in the same way that the end of Casino Royale showed Bond that trusting anyone would be his downfall.
I personally thought that avoiding anything too violent or gory would have taken away from the movie. I'll be interested to see the director's cut and how different it would have been, but I doubt it will add to the movie rather than take away from the plot.

I had the same thought... but I found the parallels to be a bit too close, especially for two movies that came out with a few years of each other. For a movie that struck so many chords of originality and complexity (and I did love it), I thought they might have come up with something a tiny bit less cliched for that bit.

I just saw the movie last night, was wondering what other movie or show had Spoiler: Where the hostages were dressed like the captors and the captors pretending to be hostages. I know I saw this somewhere else.

Great movie and like others said, should have been R rated.

It also reminded me a little too much of The Departed (with all the good guy/bad guy switcharoos), but of course The Dark Knight was a far superior movie.