Batman Sequel Title
The latest buzz on the next film.
With Warners moving forward with plans for the sequel to Batman Begins, Batman-on-Film claims to have learned what the film may be called.
According to BoF, the project could be titled either Batman Strikes or Batman Attacks. The site says it has heard both possible titles from more than one trusted source.
So just how far along is the sequel? Here's what a longtime, trusted "insider" had to say:
"This film is further along than people think. Hell, you've got actors (and their agents) scrambling to get a role in the sequel - it's going to be huge! Just look at all the talk about casting The Joker already. There are a lot of actors that covet that role.
From what I've heard, Nolan [director Christopher] and Goyer [screenwriter David] knew what they wanted to do in the sequel before BATMAN BEGINS was filmed. I know that Nolan hasn't signed on, yet, but that is just a matter of time. This is why you are hearing about cast candidates and possible screentests. Things are lined up so that when that [Nolan returning] does happen, they'll be ready to roll.
There is no doubt that they have their ducks in a row."
Hmmmm. Batman Verbs.
Quote from: GamblourHmmmm. Batman Verbs.
Question is, which verb? Somebody change this thread into a poll. An all out duel to which verb is better, "Strikes" or "Attacks". I'll take "Strikes". The other suggests Batman as some enemy combatant. Its all so fucking vague though.
between Begins, Returns, Strikes, Attacks, i'm sick of him doing anything. Batman Exists.
hmm... both have been used by star wars. dont care at all for attacks, and atleast strikes brings a resemblence to the Dark Knight book so, that one i guess. though returns is still best.
I think they should follow the lead of the Die Hard franchise
Batman: With a Vengeance
Quote from: cowboykurtisI think they should follow the lead of the Die Hard franchise
Batman: With a Vengeance
That would have to be the
next one. This sequel would be "Batman 2: Batmanner"
Quote from: polkabluesQuote from: cowboykurtisI think they should follow the lead of the Die Hard franchise
Batman: With a Vengeance
That would have to be the next one. This sequel would be "Batman 2: Batmanner"
i think it would actually be -- Batman: Bat Harder
No, no. It was right the first time.
Batman Begins... Batman Continues... Batman Ends
it has to end sometime...
Lets move on to another superhero... Fartman, Radioactive Man, even Green Lantern... enough of the same
batty boy
Quote from: GaramNo, no. It was right the first time.
you were right the first time
Pair of Penguins to Pick From
Plus, who wants to be The Joker?
Batman-on-Film is reporting a few casting rumors about the next Batman movie. Citing a trusted source, BoF claims that Philip Seymour Hoffman, currently winning raves and poised to receive an Oscar nom for his title role in Capote, is in the running to play Oswald Cobblepot, a.k.a. The Penguin, in the sequel.
The cherubic character actor's credits include Boogie Nights, Red Dragon, The Talented Mr. Ripley and Along Came Polly. He will next be seen in Mission: Impossible III.
Another name BoF has been told might be under consideration is oft-mentioned fan fave Bob Hoskins. The husky Cockney thesp seems a good fit for a Christopher Nolan Bat-cast given the filmmaker's penchant for casting British actors.
The rumor mill has suggested that Cobblepot will appear as one of the sequel's villains, not unlike how Batman Begins included Carmine Falcone and Jonathan Crane in supporting roles. He will reportedly be an arms dealer and may be of Russian or British heritage in this version. The Joker is still said to be the main adversary.
Speaking of the Clown Prince of Crime, BoF has also heard that Sam Rockwell (Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Charlie's Angels) is campaigning for the part but that he might not be under official consideration for it. Say the source, "This doesn't mean he is confirmed or unconfirmed or even under consideration, but I can definitely say that the man is pursuing the role."
Rockwell played Batman in the short film Robin's Big Date, which can be seen here. (http://www.redheadedleague.com/films/robin/robin.html)
my votes for Hoskins with this one. but man, i hope they dont overstuff this film with too many characters...
Stallone for Mr. Freeze!
I don't believe the Philip Seymour Hoffman rumor. He's too trendy a choice to be accurate. Bob Hoskins, on the other hand, would be perfect, if they are even going to use The Penguin.
This movie will suck. Save $200 million and let it go. Do a Radioactive Man movie!
Who is Next at Bat?
The latest Batman villain rumors.
A scooper has advised Moviehole of two actors who might be frontrunners for villain roles in the next Batman film. The report requires one to read between the lines; I have and here's what I've determined.
For the femme fatale role, Moviehole's source claims that "this is the first screen appearance for this character in the Batman films and she has a very close connection with a major character in Nolan's first Batman movie. She will be out for revenge against Bruce Wayne and Gotham in a major way."
The unnamed actress is said to be a SAG and Golden Globe nominee who is currently five months pregnant. "She will be in tip top fighting shape once production begins to roll early next year but not before she throws a few coins in a fountain."
That actress would be Rachel Weisz, a nominee for her role in The Constant Gardener, who is pregnant with the child of Darren Aronofsky, who directed her in The Fountain.
But which character is the scooper referring to? The most likely choice seems Ra's Al Ghul's daughter Talia, given that "she has a very close connection with a major character" in Batman Begins and is "out for revenge against Bruce Wayne and Gotham."
For the role of The Joker, the big-name actor that Warners and director Christopher Nolan are said to be eyeing "has a major film coming out this summer and it's a sequel to one of his biggest hits. In fact, his performance in the first movie was nominated for an Oscar."
That actor, of course, is Johnny Depp, an oft-mentioned fan fave to play The Joker.
Moviehole's source adds that "rumor is that he might be interested depending on the script, which is being written right now."
Depp... that would be something... I'm trying to imagine!
That would be incredible. But man, it still stings to read that Aronofsky made it with Weisz. She's so hot. One day, Gamblour....one day.
weisz for talia is perfect. i can see her now with hair covering up part of her face. thats great. i'd never considered depp for the joker, and he might be too big a name for nolan to consider him but if he did get part it would likely be great.
If they do end up casting Depp as the Joker, I will eat my socks.
It will be that cool.
Depp would be a mistake. He's too glamorous for the role and the tone of the series. I'd much prefer Geoffrey Rush or certain others already rumored.
I agree with GT. I don't want the Joker to become just another one of Depp's wacky routines, which I've become tired of. I feel Crispin Glover has a perfect natural craziness that chimes really well with this part, though he's probably not in the run.
bring back jack
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mergemag.org%2F1998%2Fnicholson.gif&hash=665d491fa6ca496601bf618ce4617ad60a85c9dd)
Quote from: Just Withnail on January 13, 2006, 08:12:24 AM
I feel Crispin Glover has a perfect natural craziness that chimes really well with this part, though he's probably not in the run.
I never thought of that but...you're right! He's got the face and the wackiness. Brilliant!
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on January 13, 2006, 07:04:08 AM
Depp would be a mistake. He's too glamorous for the role and the tone of the series. I'd much prefer Geoffrey Rush or certain others already rumored.
Depp would be a mistake because Cillian Murphy already channelled Depp to play the Scarecrow.
Geoffrey Rush wouldn't be a horrible choice but not the best either. But that would just trounce on the memory of his performance in Mystery Men.
I still like the idea of Vincent Cassel though.
geoffrey rush is too old and oldlooking for the mostly younger cast. how could bale be archenemies with his grandad?
Batman Hits Australia for Villains?
The sequel to Batman Begins could become an Australian affair now that Hugo Weaving and Hugh Jackman are in the running to play villains. The two Aussie movie stars are the latest names linked to play The Joker and Harvey 'Two Face' Dent in the upcoming superhero adventure, according to moviehole.net. Producers are yet to nail down a firm list of candidates for Two-Face, but Firewall star Paul Bettany and another Aussie, Lachy Hulme, are reportedly being considered for the role of The Joker.
Paul Bettany as the Joker? i could see that
Paul Bettany seems like an interesting choice, the way he can hike up his voice as I recall from A Knight's Tale, an interesting prospect. Would continue the supposed trend of Begins to hire younger up and coming actors for a villan role.
Some title knock-arounds:
Batman Malevolence
Batman Vendetta
Batman...the quest for peace!
based on the trailer and tv spots for Firewall i don't think Bettany would be good. it would be slightly neat if they got Keaton to do it.
Latest Bat-Scuttlebutt
Source: Batman-On-Film
Let me preface by saying this: unless otherwise noted, all BATMAN movie news should be considered rumor and treated as such. So please remember, we do report rumors. However, the buzz we report comes from sources that we've known for a long while and have been dead on accurate in the past. The rumors are simply part of the fun and the build up towards the next Bat-flick, right? When I tell y'all to chisel something in stone, go buy the damn hammer! And please don't think I'm being condescending here, OK? While I KNOW most of you get it, some of my dear readers don't -- and they let me know it in their emails.
Now, on with today's report...
I'm going to simply list several of his blurbs -- some will be quotes, others will consist of me paraphrasing "Jindrak."
"With the inclusion of the Joker & the general public's renewed interest, Warner know & appreciate more than ever the importance of listening to the fans & leaving Chris & David to get on with it!"
Paul Bettany is "in the mix" for the part of The Joker. As he himself recently, it's all about money and negotiating power. It's not lost on anyone that he's one of the fan faves for the role.
"As for Josh Lucas and the role of Harvey Dent, I've been informed that Christian is very much behind Josh, having worked with him on AMERICAN PSYCHO. If the fans are just as passionate about him getting the role of Harvey as Josh is, then its a very good chance he will be the new DA of Gotham City."
As it has been reported here and on other sites, work is "well underway" on The Sequel. In the coming months, "speculation will be rife regarding various roles within the sequel & it's plot, which is to be expected."
Batman 2 Plot Details
Batman on Film has an absurd connection to the Batman film franchise, as tipsters always seem to be queuing up to share insider information with them. Today, they've got a line on early plot information for Batman 2 thanks to an insider they promise us is legitimate. Here are the salient bits of information from our friendly tipster.
- "They" pretty much have got the plot for the film outlined.
- Nolan has been re-going over all of the various Batman comics even more to comb for fine details.
- They (Nolan and co.) want it to be even darker than BEGINS.
- The studio is supportive of creating something as accurate to the Batman comic books as possible and less about it being some kind of summer popcorn "mega-hit."
Chris Nolan and David Goyer were both on hand for the recent Saturn Awards and talked a little BEGINS sequel to IESB.NET. Nolan and Goyer confirmed that they've come up with a good story for the next Bat-film. Besides that, they were very vague -- In fact, Nolan "jokingly" warned Goyer not to say a thing. There has been a bit of speculation that Goyer wouldn't have anything to do with The Sequel since Nolan's brother Jonah is writing the screenplay. However, BOF has said not to read too much into that and Goyer would be involved (The story is based on an outline by both Goyer and Nolan).
Robin Williams, Joker?
The actor's thoughts on portraying the famous Batman villian.
News of what's happening with the sequel to Batman Begins has been scant of late. Director Christopher Nolan has been hard at work on his Batman Begins follow-up, The Prestige, which re-teams the director with Christian Bale.
Most believe that the director's next film after Prestige will be a sequel to Batman Begins, likely with The Joker stepping into the villain slot.
Many actors have been rumored to play the part, but fan favorites include Paul Bettany and Adrien Brody. Another actor who has been mentioned in connection with the series since way back during casting for The Riddler in Batman Forever is Robin Williams. Of course it helps that the actor has a connection with Christopher Nolan, having starred for the director in Insomnia.
IGN FilmForce spoke to Williams about the possibility this weekend. He was enthusiastic about the prospect.
"Oh God, I'd love to do that one."
Williams is famous for his Jack Nicholson impression, but he suspects Nolan would be looking for a new take. "Well, you want to do a different Joker. You know, if they do Arkham Asylum, it would be amazing. Arkham Asylum is one of the greatest, nastiest comic books ever. It's truly, it's like the Marquee de Sade on that level, and wonderfully damaged and quite tragic, in terms of when you realize [what happened to] create these characters..."
We asked Williams whether he saw The Joker as more over-the-top or dark.
"You can go both," Williams said. "As in madness, there's a lot of ways to go. I think you can really explore how bright and how nasty-funny he is, just like I guess what Kevin [Spacey] did with Lex Luthor, made him really funny, but yet still damaged... As evil is, accessible and yet still horrific. Jump back and forth all the time. I'm kidding... Kidding!"
On the second kidding, Williams gave me a soft poke in the throat with two fingers. Amusing, but a bit surprising.
"See there it is," says Williams. I saw your eyes go f**k off!"
Williams is an admitted fan of comics and/or graphic novels. "It's interesting now that they're doing, they are kind of realize, with all the adult comic books or graphic novels for those who are trying to upscale themselves... Is that a comic book? No! It's a graphic novel! Is that porn? No! It's adult entertainment!"
"They're making these really interesting pieces and there's a lot of great, great comic books and graphic novels out there that could make wonderful movies. They're looking for them, and it's great... I read this comic book called DMZ [by Brian Wood], which is about New York after kind of a Civil War. Could it happen? Every time the helicopters fly over my house I'm going, 'Welcome to Baghdad!' But it's kind of fascinating, because they treat it like the country's divided. All these cities like Lebanon and Beirut and Baghdad and military zones of control, yet it's still the village and it's still it's own. Fascinating concept. That's what's good about alternative forms of literature or stuff that you read..."
Oh god. Well maybe. Nope, I don't like it.
Fuck no.
Let me say that again.
Fuck no.
I will buy Chris Nolan a case of beer if he casts Adrien Brody as the Joker. I will kick him square in the nuts if he casts Robin Williams.
i now think keaton is the perfect choice.
Exclusive Scoop: We Know Who The Joker Is! HA HA
Source: Latino Review
For months, gossip has been circulating who would play The Joker in the next Batman Begins sequel. It's definite that the next sequel will concentrate on The Joker and they're already throwing names around such as Steve Buscemi - Robin Williams - Lachy Hulme -Alexis Denisof – and Mark Hamill.
We were first to tell the world that Brandon Routh was going to be the new Superman. Now here we are at it again as we just got word from A VERY TRUSTED SOURCE that the offer last night was officially made to Heath Ledger to star as The Joker in the Batman Begins Sequel! As Ari Gold on HBO'S Entourage would say: Heath Motherfuckin' Brokeback The Joker Ledger!
weird... he's like, what, my age?
LET ME JUST PRAY TO GOD ALOUD THAT THIS IS NOT TRUE> PLEASE GOD, DO NOT PUT HEATH LEDGER IN A BATMAN FILM. THANK YOU LORD.
thats just weird :shock:
Quote from: modage on July 20, 2006, 01:48:23 PM
LET ME JUST PRAY TO GOD ALOUD THAT THIS IS NOT TRUE> PLEASE GOD, DO NOT PUT HEATH MOTHERFUCKIN' BROKEBACK LEDGER IN A BATMAN FILM. THANK YOU LORD.
I don't really see the problem. As long as he can smile big. He's the right age for the part, if they're following the Killing Joke origin story.
I was really pulling for Vincent Cassel.
after the capoeira heist sequence in Ocean's 12, I just don't care about him anymore.
there goes my hopes of seeing Brody in the sequel
there's still the possibility of a homeless cameo.
Heath Ledger is a daring choice - I think he could be right choice.
At first my hopes were for Sean Penn but on second thought I don't think he would have been the best choice. Sean Penn stands alongside Daniel Day Lewis as an amazing actor - but sadly a one note actor. They both belong to the school of early Robert De Niro. That is, take roles that challenge your dedication off screen so you can give an intense performance on screen. When both actors were asked to do leading man roles or quiet performances, they either misfired or just came off as very bland. The reason that Sean Penn wouldn't be the right choice for an intense role like the Joker is because his career would have already made his interpretation of the Joker slightly predictable.
Heath Ledger is going into the role known for leading man roles and a stunning quiet performance. He is also desiring ambitious roles and choosing accordingly. No one will know what they will get when he plays Bob Dylan for Todd Hayne's next film. And I have no clue what to expect when he takes on the role of the Joker. I think he could be ambitius and try to find a middle ground in playing the Joker where everyone else would play to the extreme. Going for the extreme is ridiculous because Jack Nicholson already took it as far as anyone could.
Playing to the extreme may also be wrong for the series. Burton's films prided themselves on the huge production values that made the animation of the comic books a reality. While Burton downplayed Bruce Wayne he did play the Joker up to everything that the comic books expressed as far as super ego and super villianry went. In the new series the main chord being struck is the middle ground approach. Batman Begins had the element of fantasy and natural storytelling that didn't rely on super egos. The villians used in Batman Begins were used for the development of Bruce Wayne into Batman. My friends complained the Scarecrow was wasted because he got limited action and not enough cool lines. He wasn't. He was used according to what was necessary for the character arc to the story of Batman.
Batman Begins is really good. I just dont think it is excellent drama. It is adaqaute storytelling just with the perfect focus. If the second film is going to be about the Joker, then they are going to need an actor who will try to develop the Joker as a character and not a regular criminal waiting to be turned into a pyschotic by a freak accident.
Heath Ledger? It's TRUE
Source; Batman-On-Film
Friday, July 21, 2006 - 8:26 AM PACIFIC TIME: I usually don't go out on a limb unless I have had something confirmed. Heath Ledger will be The Joker. From my BEST source:
"Nolan has been in secret talks with Ledger for some time....The fan favorites like Paul Bettany, Crispin Glover and your fave pick, Lachy Hulme, were just grist for the mill. Ledger will be playing The Joker. The offer was made last night, and it will be a done deal."
There you have it. Heath Ledger is The Joker.
Quote from: Ghostboy on May 02, 2006, 05:40:40 PM
Amazing. My interest in this film suddenly dropped about 90%.
Mod mod mod... you get so Moddy around this time of year.
Oddly, I'm okay with this. I think the whole Robin Williams rumor was released intentionally to soften the blow a little bit. Like, "Heath Ledger? That's a little weird... but at least it's not Robin Williams." Which, I admit, was the very first thing that went through my mind.
Batman Sequel Update
The Joker, the title and a wee bit more.
A few more kernels of information about the planned sequel to Batman Begins have surfaced online today. The Batman-on-Film.com website has heard, as almost everyone has by now, that Heath Ledger is going to play The Joker in the next movie.
The site claims The Joker will be just one of the villains in a larger story and that he won't appear until halfway through the movie, a la Batman in Begins. He is also expected to have a backstory. The Joker will not be the only villain in the film. "I know you've heard this before but trust me -- Nolan and his brother have a couple of surprises up their sleeves!"
"From what I've heard about the direction of the film expect The Joker to be very creepy and very extreme," a trusted source for BoF advised the site, claiming that Ledger's Clown Prince will be totally unlike Jack Nicholson's portrayal in the 1989 film.
BoF's source suggests, "Heath Ledger is perfect for the role as he has never played this kind of part before which is what Nolan was after. Think about it – if you see Sam Rockwell or Robin Williams or even Hugo Weaving, you'd know exactly how they would play the role before even seeing the film and that's not very intriguing for fans is it? I have a feeling Paul Bettany was out of the mix after his performance in The Da Vinci Code."
BoF also reports that any previously rumored titles for the sequel are just that. "The title will most likely not be known until they've finished shooting."
K, I didn't see the davinci code and of course the nolans know more than me. However, look at this picture and tell me you don't see the Joker
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi46.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff149%2Fsquints06%2F12m.gif&hash=d9cd6776201d3473d0b898eee892a16a8f202233)
Quote from: squints on July 27, 2006, 09:29:27 PM
K, I didn't see the davinci code and of course the nolans know more than me. However, look at this picture and tell me you don't see the Joker
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi46.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff149%2Fsquints06%2F12m.gif&hash=d9cd6776201d3473d0b898eee892a16a8f202233)
All I see in that picture is the guy who took Jennifer Connelly off the market.
Fucker... :yabbse-angry:
The Batty D.A
Source: Moviehole
So we've got a youngish Batman. We've also just heard that a youngster has been cast to play The Joker. Guess it makes sense then to have a young Harvey Dent?
Batman On Film reports that youthful thespian Ryan Phillippe ("Crash", "I Know What You Did Last Summer") is rumored to be up for the role of young D.A Harvey Dent – the chap that ultimately transforms into the deformed fiend, Two-Face – in the next "Batman" movie.
Initially, that trusty ol' rumor mill suggested an older actor, say Josh Lucas (who has confessed to the media that he'd love to play the role) or long-time fave Liv Schrieber, may be up for the role of Dent, but seems the studio is sticking with the tradition of 'going younger' for the new "Batman" series and is eyeballing the "Crash" star for the much coveted gig. If Phillippe does sign, he'd be required back for another "Batman" sequel, the one in which he'd make his shift into the guise of Two Face.
Like both Christian Bale (Batman) and Heath Ledger (The Joker), Phillippe, married to Oscar Winner Reese Witherspoon, ain't too shabby of an actor either, which may also have a lot to do with his potential - remember, it's merely a rumour at the moment - casting.
In the next "Batman" film, Dent teams with Batman to track down the clown prince of crime, The Joker, who the Caped Crusader has developed a personal vendetta against.
Quote from: MacGuffin on July 29, 2006, 11:54:24 AM
Like both Christian Bale (Batman) and Heath Ledger (The Joker), Phillippe married to Oscar Winner Reese Witherspoon
:yabbse-grin:
Damn, this film will be full of pretty boys. Until Phillipe becomes Two Face.
The Penguin Confirmed? Ledger Not Done-Deal?
Source: Batman-On-Film
Y'all are going to LOVE this! I think. Anyway, this comes in from probably my best source who confirmed many things for BOF in the past (such as the Katie Holmes and Ken Watanabe casting; the offer made to Ledger). Here goes:
As you have long suspected, the two main villains in the BATMAN BEGINS sequel will be The Joker and The Penquin.
I can confirm (as I did a few weeks ago) that while an offer has been made to Heath Ledger, Ledger has not signed any deal, and is reluctant to do so (at the moment.) Ledger is not a lock.
It seems Nolan has been listening to you guys when it comes to casting his other villain, however. I can confirm that an offer has been made to Phillip Seymour Hoffman for the role. Yet Hoffman has indicated that he may not get involved in the sequel.
Also, industry reaction to the Ledger 'leak' has been much like the fans: A fair bit of head scratching, and a generally tepid response.
So the scuttlebutt long reported by BOF that The Penguin will be in the sequel looks to be true (The rumor is that he'll be a British arms dealer/mob boss with designs on Gotham). Also, this was the second time in a very short time frame that I heard that Ledger, while offered the part, had not yet signed on.
Hoffman as the Penguin would be cool, but he might not do it just because it seems a little too obvious.
It's funny that they're talking about Ledger not being a lock because I've heard that Dennis Leary was actually being considered despite what they're saying about Ledger.
Quote from: RegularKarate on July 31, 2006, 02:39:06 PM
It's funny that they're talking about Ledger not being a lock because I've heard that Dennis Leary was actually being considered despite what they're saying about Ledger.
I hope that's not the case. I like Denis Leary, and he's very, very good at playing "Denis Leary" characters, but I don't think he's enough of a real
actor to pull off a role like that. He does look the part, though.
So is Adrien Brody busy? Have they even talked to him? Doesn't Chris Nolan know a good idea when I tell it to him?
Quote from: polkablues on July 31, 2006, 06:10:09 PM
I hope that's not the case. I like Denis Leary, and he's very, very good at ...nothing
I hope not too.. he's a shit bucket and his no talent Bill Hicks ripoff ass deserves dick-all
Batman Sequel Title Announced
And Warners confirms Joker casting.
Warner Bros. has announced the title of the next film in the Batman franchise. The Dark Knight will be the name of the Chris Nolan-directed flick. And the studio confirms that Heath Ledger will play the role of The Joker. An official press release is expected on Tuesday, so watch for more news!
The confirmation comes after rumors had begun to circulate online that Ledger was reluctant to sign on to play The Clown Prince of Crime.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Ledger and The Dark Knight!
Source: Latino Review
As a follow up to last year's blockbuster Batman Begins, Christopher Nolan is set to direct Warner Bros. Pictures' The Dark Knight, written by Jonathan Nolan, based on a story by Christopher Nolan and David Goyer. The film will be produced by Emma Thomas, Charles Roven and Christopher Nolan. Additionally, Christian Bale will resume his role as Bruce Wayne and Academy Award nominee Heath Ledger has been cast as The Joker. The announcements were made today by Jeff Robinov, President of Production, Warner Bros. Pictures.
Christopher Nolan revamped the Batman franchise in 2005 with the immensely successful Batman Begins, starring Christian Bale in the title role, which chronicled the early years of the superhero. Nolan first garnered attention from critics and fans in 2000 with the groundbreaking drama Memento, which he wrote and directed. He went on to direct the thriller Insomnia, starring Al Pacino and Robin Williams, and recently wrapped production on The Prestige, with Hugh Jackman and Bale.
Bale was most recently seen in the ensemble cast of Terrence Malick's The New World. His other credits include Little Women, Portrait of a Lady, Metroland, American Psycho, Laurel Canyon and Steven Spielberg's Empire of the Sun, which was his first starring role.
Ledger most recently earned Oscar Golden Globe, BAFTA and SAG Award nominations and won the New York Film Critics Circle Award for Best Actor for his portrayal of Ennis Del Mar in the award-winning drama Brokeback Mountain. His other credits include Casanova, Monster's Ball, Lords of Dogtown, The Brothers Grimm and The Patriot.
"Chris' unique vision is what made Batman Begins such an outstanding film and we could not imagine anyone else at the helm of The Dark Knight," said Robinov. "We also can't wait to see two such formidable actors as Christian and Heath face off with each other as Batman and The Joker."
"I'm excited to continue the story we started with Batman Begins," added Nolan. "Our challenge in casting The Joker was to find an actor who is not just extraordinarily talented but fearless. Watching Heath Ledger's interpretation of this iconic character taking on Christian Bale's Batman is going to be incredible."
Production is set to begin on The Dark Knight in early 2007.
the title is the best thing ever. unless they do something stupid like add Batman II: before it or something. i guess that helps to swallow the bitter pill that is ledgers official casting news. i really really really hope he can pull this off.
don't you wish the jokey-joke role went to this guy:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.timeinc.net%2Fpeople%2Fi%2F2006%2Fstartracks%2F060814%2Fdaniel_day_lewis.jpg&hash=c1a96dadcd4ec5401a21c8e89f1ec4d6f8517e32)
Exclusive: Bale's Take on The Dark Knight
Source: Filmfocus.com.uk
It's become so overdone now that we might be getting bored if only it weren't such a treat; Christian Bale delivers another stunning performance in another five-star production when Harsh Times arrives in UK cinemas on August 8th.
And so it was that we saw ourselves chatting excitedly with Bale himself as part of a big interview feature which'll be on the site next week. But we couldn't keep this part quiet, much as we couldn't stop ourselves from asking the questions. With the announcement this week that the title of Chris Nolan's Batman Begins sequel would be The Dark Knight and with the even more exciting announcement that Heath "He's So Hot Right Now" Ledger would be tackling the Joker, we just had to get Bale's take on events.
"I just love that title," Bale told FilmFocus, "You know, nothing's written in stone yet, but I like, very much, that it doesn't have 'Batman' written in the title. This take on Batman of mine and Chris' is very different from any of the others and everything else always had Batman in the title. I think this is kind-of distancing it even further and saying, 'Hey, this is a whole different creature from what has come before.'"
Much as Ledger is a wildly different choice for the Joker; in Tim Burton's 1989 version the role went to The Smile himself, Jack Nicholson. "Absolutely," Bale told us, "Heath is very much into what Chris had done with the first one and he's very passionate about the role. And he's a really good actor so we're going to see something very special from him."
And what of the status of the project at the moment? Can Bale drop any hints? "You know what, you're going to get people coming out and shooting you in the head any second if you keep asking anymore Batman questions," Bale joked. Or, at least, we hope he did. "I'm learning about it right now; Chris and I have only just finished working on The Prestige together and I have another project before we start on Batman. I know I'm in very good hands and Chris is keeping me informed about what's going on. But more than that and I'll be whisked away in a loony van, you know, off to Arkham Asylum!"
Bale also told us that his partnership with Nolan, which'll have extended to three features by the time The Dark Knight hits cinemas, is based on a solid working relationship. "As long as it's a good working relationship," he told us, "that's all that matters. But Chris is the director I've worked with more than anyone else and what's nice, when you do come to understand each other, is you do get this common language so you really don't have to speak a whole lot; often too much talking just kind-of ruins everything. And it's nice when you know the way someone works anyway and you don't have to break that ice at all. It was a very lucky thing for me when I met Chris and became part of his circle of filmmaking."
Quote from: pozeR on August 04, 2006, 05:25:58 PM
don't you wish the jokey-joke role went to this guy:
nah i was hoping:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi5.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy154%2Fpubrick%2Fvidcaps%2FFULL_METAL_JACKET-18.jpg&hash=6e4d42321526bee542ca318d3ce2de127d7b0116)
touché
Quote from: pozeR on August 05, 2006, 04:51:46 PM
touché
pozeR: Hey man, you got change for a ten?
Man on street: No, sorry, all I have is a five
pozeR: touché
Man on street: ????
touché, rk... touché.
Quote from: RegularKarate on August 05, 2006, 05:30:49 PM
Quote from: pozeR on August 05, 2006, 04:51:46 PM
touché
pozeR: Hey man, you got change for a ten?
Man on street: No, sorry, all I have is a five
pozeR: touché
Man on street: ????
he's no walrus..
Quote from: Walrus on September 25, 2003, 03:34:27 PM
Touche.
Quote from: Walrus on December 13, 2004, 12:55:46 PM
Touche.
Quote from: Walrus on July 01, 2005, 12:25:13 PM
Touche.
Quote from: Walrus on September 06, 2005, 03:48:05 PM
Touche.
Quote from: Walrus on January 07, 2004, 03:25:17 PM
Touche.
Quote from: Walrus on January 28, 2005, 06:01:28 PM
Touche.
Quote from: Walrus on September 05, 2005, 02:13:08 PM
Touche.
plus, anybody who reads larry david interviews already knows the truth about that wicked, wicked word:
Laugh Factory: I thought the genius was that [Seinfeld] was a show about nothing.
Larry David: C'mon baby, get hip. That was last year.
Laugh Factory: Touche.
Larry David: Damn! I wanted to say touche. It's a great way to make someone think they said something clever even if you don't mean it. If someone says to you, "Why don't you go fuck yourself," you simply respond, "Touche," and you're out of there.
Laugh Factory: I get the feeling I'm wearing out my welcome.
Larry David: Touche.
tou·ché (tū-shā')
interj.
Used to acknowledge a hit in fencing or a successful criticism or an effective point in argument.
i think my first touché worked. i displayed some wardrobe, p said this would look better, and i acknowledged his better choice.
Sick Title. Ledger's is a bit of left field casting, which only makes this whole thing more interesting to me. He can't top Nicholson,I think his Joker will be a little lesstheatrical and more lethal.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dc-kingdom.com%2Fplugins%2Fp2000_image_gallery%2Fimages%2F32.jpg&hash=106a148cca4a582ac733f2cec8039802e33eced9)
Does it piss anyone else off that 99 out of 100 people who quote that line quote it wrong?
Stupid, boring ass jokes piss me off.
yes, that was the worst comic i've ever seen.
Quote from: modage on August 11, 2006, 08:26:04 AM
yes, that was the worst comic i've ever seen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathy
DARK KNIGHT update
Description: Producer Charles Roven talks about the next Batman film.
Source: Black Film
Now that it has been announced that Heath Ledger is playing the Joker, can confirm any news about Philip Seymour Hoffman as the Penguin?
Charles Roven: Well, one of the things that we have always done, as we did with "Batman Begins", is that we don't comment on any rumors because it takes all the fun away. We're really thrilled about Heath Ledger playing the Joker. As Chris Nolan said, the great thing about Heath is that he commits himself fully and totally to everything he does. He's just a brilliant, brilliant actor and this Joker is a very interesting dark fellow.
Can you comment on any of the returning characters like Luscious Fox or Jim Gordon?
CR: Certainly, Christian Bale is going to play Batman and Bruce Wayne. We are hoping, depending on everyobody's schedule and other aspects on what it is that they want to do with their careers, that we are going to get most of them if not all of them, back in the movie. That is the characters that are alive. Also, the script is in the process of being written. There isn't a screenplay that exist right now so I can't really tell you much more than that.
Are you going to be shooting the film next year?
CR: We are supposed to start shooting what we call a pre-shoot, which we know what that is, in January and the main body of the film will start in March.
In most superhero films and in previous Batman films, the love interest tends to change, will you follow the same suit?
CR: The script is not written yet, so I can't tell you who's coming back. I know that there is a desire to bring back as many characters as possible. I know Chris is working. I don't think that he'll do it in a way where it's hamfisted. It's got to be naturally progressive in the movie or not. There are of course availability issues and contractual issues. It's not just a "Yes, I'm coming back".
What was the reason to go with the "Dark Knight" title?
CR: It was a title that Chris (Nolan) suggested and everybody really embraced. We thought it was a really good natural progression from "Batman Begins".
Was The Joker cast in the film from the beginning?
CR: I think from the time that Chris ended the first film and it had that Joker card until the time that he came up with the concept of what the next chapter was going to be that he was thinking about the Joker. That's why we were able to know that there's going to be a significant part for that character in this film.
'Thank You for Smoking' actress Katie Holmes has started an intense exercise and diet regime for her role in the 'Batman Begins' sequel.
Katie Holmes has embarked on a strict exercise plan to get ready for the new 'Batman' film.
The 'Thank You for Smoking' star - who gave birth to daughter Suri four months ago - is desperate to shed her post-baby weight to reprise her role as Rachel Dawes, Bruce Wayne's love interest in the 'Batman Begins' sequel.
A source told Australia's NW magazine: "Katie has been told to be ready for filming the new 'Batman' movie in January, which gives her plenty of time to get back in shape. But she has no intention of taking things slowly."
The 27-year-old - who is engaged to 'Top Gun' actor Tom Cruise - has already hit the gym and put herself on a strict diet.
The source added: "She's already in the gym every day and is being super-strict about what she eats. She's also doing yoga and has started kickboxing."
No amount of yoga and kickboxing will change that fact that she's Katie Holmes.
the best possible option is for the joker to kill her. that would be pretty hardcore. because that raises the stakes, makes it personal (since he wont be killing his parents this time around), can substitute for the death of robin type storyline, and also get rid of her character (where there is no where else to go) without doing the whole vicki vale 'its the next movie and she's not here so we're broken up' thing. fingers crossed.
Quote from: modage on August 16, 2006, 09:44:50 AM
the best possible option is for the joker to kill her. that would be pretty hardcore.
he should kill her and say something like "no more boom boom for this baby-san". that would be hard fucking core.
Exclusive! Dirt on The Dark Knight!
Source: BetterThanFudge
A couple weeks ago I spent some time chatting with director Christopher Nolan for an upcoming feature in Mean Magazine all about his new flick, The Prestige.
In addition to talking about the dueling magicians thriller at length Nolan indulged some of my curiosity about his next little project you might have heard of...the next Batman film!
You're going to have to wait until the issue hits the streets October 23rd for the whole lengthy dialogue but in the meanwhile here's a taste...
Horowitz: Batman Begins dealt with a range of themes from revenge to how we confront fear. What themes will you be exploring in The Dark Knight?
Nolan: I suppose in loose terms I can say it's about things having to get worse before they get better.
Horowitz: It's that note the first film ends on of escalation?
Nolan: Very much.
Horowitz: Is there anything to be inferred from the name you've chosen for this film, The Dark Knight?
Nolan: Ultimately yes. [Laughs] But I'll leave that for people to infer.
Horowitz: This is the cryptic portion of our chat.
Nolan: Yeah. [Laughs] The title has been chosen very specifically. It's quite important to the film.
Horowitz: I take it [the Joker] will be less Cesar Romero and Jack Nicholson than the Joker we saw portrayed in a comic like The Killing Joke?
Nolan: Yes. I would certainly point to The Killing Joke but I also would point very much to the first two appearances of the Joker in the comic. If you look at where the Joker comes from there's a very clear direction that fits what we're doing very well.
Chris Nolan on The Dark Knight Casting Rumors
Source: IESB
Ever since the conclusion of Batman Begins rumors have run rampant regarding the cast of the next film to follow.
Even before the announcement of the Dark Knight title, or the casting of Heath Ledger, there has been constant talk of which actors would be offered roles in the film. Is there any truth to any of these rumors?
The IESB, along with a few select websites, were invited down to an edit bay visit with Chris Nolan and Emma Thomas while he was doing the final sound mixing for The Prestige which stars Hugh Jackman, Christian Bale, Scarlett Johansson, and Michael Caine.
In the midst of all the Prestige talk, we were able to get him to talk a bit about the highly anticipated Batman sequel.
Ryan Phillippe and Phillip Seymore Hoffman have been rumored to be in the running for Harvey Dent and the Penguin, respectively. Is there any validity here or pure speculation? "As the penguin, no, not true." Also, was Sean Penn originally offered the role of the Joker before Heath Ledger? Laughingly he said, "no, no truth to any of those rumors."
Here is the entire transcript of the Batman Begins questions:
Q: Looking at Batman Begins now, were you surprised or was that the reaction you were expecting to get?
CN: I was very surprised for the simple reason that I felt that we really put our hearts into making a great film and I felt that on our own terms we had succeeded but I never never really expected to satisfy critics and fans, you know Batman fans, and regular audiences equally. I mean I thought maybe we'd get two points of the triangle but the fact that all three groups seem to respond well, that was a big surprise. It felt like you were going to lose one aspect of that somewhere along the line. But, I don't know, we were very fortunate in that regard.
Q: Because the formula works so well is that something that you were looking to do for The Dark Knight?
CN: I think, what people responded to most about Batman Begins is how different it was from their expectations. So I think we would be foolish to not recognize that and attempt to do something very different in the sequel. I certainly wouldn't have, you know, any interest in somewhat trying to repeat the experience that the film already made because I think, particularly being an origin story, it's a very unique thing very singular. My interest in the sequel is to move on from there and do something quite different.
Q: Since you did the origin story, it frees you up from doing the whole introduction, so are you expecting to do a whole lot more action the second time around?
CN: Um, I mean we certainly put a lot of action into Batman Begins through the film even though it didn't involve Batman until 50 minutes in or whatever. So certainly we are free to put Batman into action earlier on. But if you look at the, I mean the rhythm of action movies is very complicated because there is a limit actually to how much action is in the film, how you have to have a particular ebb and flow to what actually works and Batman Begins is pretty stuffed to be honest. But, it didn't all get to involve that character, Bruce Wayne was Batman because of the origin and that we don't have to do.
Q: Any truth to the rumors of Ryan Phillippe or Phillip Seymore Hoffman?
CN: (Laughing) As the penguin, no, not true.
Q: Sean Penn?
CN: No truth, no truth to any of those rumors. All interesting ideas though.
So there you have it folks, straight from the horses mouth. So who will be starring alongside Christian Bale and Heath Ledger? Well we will just have to wait and see!
Penguin not in the cards for Hoffman
Source: Batman-on-film.com
According to various sources, it looks as though Phillip Seymour Hoffman has turned down the offer to play The Penguin in the upcoming Batman film THE DARK KNIGHT.
"A full offer was made to Phillip Seymour Hoffman for the role of Cobblepot/The Penguin," writes a Batman-on-film source. "Hoffman was very cautious about accepting the role following his Oscar win (Capote), and has since declined the part."
Chris Nolan has also spoke recently saying that both Sean Penn and Hoffman won't be in the upcoming film. He did not say if the parts were ever offered or if it was simply Internet speculation.
Heath Ledger has finally spoken about playing The Joker. Here's what he had to say (via THE TORONTO STAR):
"It's definitely going to stump people. I think it'll be more along the lines of how the Joker was meant to be in the comics, darker and more sinister."
Q: How about playing the Joker in The Dark Knight? I have to admit, I would never have thought of you for the role.
A: I wouldn't have thought of me, either. But it's obviously not going to be what Jack Nicholson did. It's going to be more nuanced and dark and more along the lines of a Clockwork Orange kind of feel. Which is, I think, what the comic book was after: less about his laugh and more about his eyes.
Quote from: MacGuffin on September 08, 2006, 01:30:18 PM
"It's definitely going to stump people. I think it'll be more along the lines of how the Joker was meant to be in the comics, darker and more sinister."
lets hope so. thats what they kept saying about Spaceys Lex Luthor, but he ended up being just as campy as Hackman for the most part. and its not as if Nicholson was completely ridiculous, i mean he did seem insane and he did murder people. so, you know.
More comments from Heath Ledger:
"I actually hate comic book movies, like fucking hate them, they just bore me shitless and they're just dumb. But I thought what Chris Nolan did with Batman was actually really good, really well directed, and Christian Bale was really great in it."
All I can say: finally someone says it.
Full interview: http://www.darkhorizons.com/news06/ledger.php
he really stuck it to Fantastic Four and Daredevil!
Guy Pearce Vs. Heath Ledger?
Source: Moviehole
Its always been speculated that Guy Pearce might be involved with one of the new "Batman" movies one day – because of his association with "Memento" director Christopher Nolan, who helms the "Bat" blockies – and now, according to Batman On Film, said speculation might be spot-on.
Pearce is said to be the new favourite – Now that Liv Schrieber is apparently no longer in the running – to play Harvey Dent, Gotham D.A, in "The Dark Knight". Dent's a good-guy that teams up with Batman to bring down The Joker (Heath Ledger) in the next pic. Later on though, Dent himself goes a little screwloose, involuntarily transformed into the disfigured menace, 'Two-Face'.
If Pearce signs for the film, he'll be the second Aussie onboard the pic. Ledger, of course, hails from beachy Perth.
Another Aussie actor, Lachy Hulme, was rumoured to be up for the role of 'The Joker' there for a while. But Hulme tells Batman On Film that he never met on the film – and as far as he's concerned, it was something that fans had come up with.
"The first I heard of it, someone rang me to say that they'd heard on the radio that I actually had the part, and this was before Batman Begins had even come out, so this was early 2005. And on the radio, they were apparently quoting from your site, so there you have it. Of course, I had to explain to my family that I wasn't playing the part, but from that moment on, the media have been chasing me around asking for a quote, which I couldn't give. But every other weekend down here, there would be some blurb or column in the papers talking about how I was the "front-runner" or some shit. Thank God Heath got the gig, 'cause now the press can all fuck off. But the Internet speculation has been extraordinary. Unbelievable!".
Though Hulme says he never tested (but nobody did for the part) and didn't meet with director Chris Nolan, he does have some ideas on how he might have played the part had the rumours been true.
"Obviously you come to work with your own ideas, with your own prep and your research done, and you try to impose some sort of personal vision onto the role you're playing, whether that be through the costume or the accent or the ticking clock inside whomever you're playing, or whatever. But even with a role like The Joker, which is open to so much interpretation, you ultimately have to acquiesce to the director, otherwise get out of the way. Acting is not like painting. You don't get to sit in a corner and create your own special thing. You're part of a team. You're servicing a vision, particularly in feature films. That's what you get paid for.
"I suppose the obvious thing would be to just go back to the original version of the character. That interests me. Everyone raves about what Alan Moore did with The Killing Joke, but ultimately, that version of the character demands you to feel sympathy for the guy, and I don't believe we should feel anything but fear and disgust for him. For me, the most interesting version is what Bob Kane and Bill Finger did with the first incarnation of the character, which was basically a prototype for the modern-day serial killer, something like what The Zodiac Killer in San Francisco in the 60s and 70s was, a killer who announces his crimes and then commits them in a way that makes no sense, and then just disappears back into the shadows. An unstoppable force, a very dark, scary force. I found that very compelling, that first ever Joker story. At the end of the day, there should be nothing sympathetic about a character like The Joker, and certainly nothing funny about him. I know everybody hearing this or, sorry, reading this will hate me for saying that, but that would be my jumping-off point as an actor. Until the director told me to shut up and do it his way. (laughs) And by the way, I'm not trying to insult The Killing Joke or Alan Moore or anything like that. In fact, I can see why his take on The Joker has inspired such a passionate following, because it's, y'know, such an intelligent and literate take on the character for the modern reader. But you can't go past the Bob Kane/Bill Finger version, in my opinion. They nailed him right from the start".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ledger on The Joker -- Again!
Source: Batman-On-Film
After being silent for about a month since word broke that he'd been cast as The Joker in THE DARK KNIGHT, Heath Ledger has talked quite a bit about nabbing the part here of late. Here's the latest from MSN.COM:
It's Ledger's next role as Batman's nemesis The Joker in Chris Nolan's "The Dark Knight" that has fanboys' tongues wagging. Ledger says he hasn't paid attention to the scuttlebutt on the Web about his casting and wasn't that surprised to get the offer from Nolan.
"When he explained to me the angle he wanted to take, I was like, 'Yeah, I could do that,'" Ledger says. "[Nolan's] going to make it a lot more sinister, and we've got a little plan for him, but it's exciting. Any opportunity to don a mask is always exciting to me."
[BATMAN (1989)] was dominated by Jack Nicholson's acclaimed performance as the psychotic villain, but Ledger isn't intimidated by his predecessor's turn.
"I love, love, love what Nicholson did," Ledger says. "[But] his performance was catering to the style of directing the movie was made under. It was a Tim Burton film. It wasn't Chris Nolan."
:doh: why isn't guy pearce playing the joker?
Nolans Talk Dark Knight
Siblings on scripting the Bat-sequel.
Filmmaker Christopher Nolan says the reason was "more circumstances than anything else" for why his writer brother Jonathan "Jonah" Nolan was tapped to write the screenplay for The Dark Knight, the sequel to Batman Begins. Jonah served in a consulting capacity on the 2005 film.
"When [Batman Begins co-screenwriter] David Goyer and I sat down about a year ago to hammer out the story treatment for another Batman, he was going off to direct a film [The Invisible] and I was going off to direct a film [The Prestige]," Chris Nolan recalls in the Sept./Oct. issue of Creative Screenwriting magazine.
He continued, "Jonah seemed the most obvious choice for someone to crack on the script and see if our story held any water. You sit there with your cue cards [note cards], but till you have to write a screenplay you never actually know what you've got. So we pulled the pin and tossed the grenade."
Jonah credits Chris with turning him onto Batman in the first place after buying him Frank Miller's graphic novel The Dark Knight Returns for his 14th birthday. "I have loved and cherished that character from that point, but through the lens of Frank Miller: Batman: Dark Knight Returns and Batman: Year One."
Jonah also draws comparisons between Batman and the magician protagonists in The Prestige. "What's cool about Bruce Wayne and these magicians is that they are a stand-in for the filmmaker. They recognize that it's a normal world, and so they build a more interesting one."
In related news, Michael Caine says on his official site "that in March I reprise my Butler roll [as Alfred] in the second Batman again directed by Christopher Noland starring Christian Bale. This one is 'The Joker' and the Joker is Heath Ledger. Great casting."
Quote from: MacGuffin on September 25, 2006, 05:05:36 PM
In related news, Michael Caine says on his official site "that in March I reprise my Butler roll [as Alfred] in the second Batman again directed by Christopher Noland starring Christian Bale. This one is 'The Joker' and the Joker is Heath Ledger. Great casting."
Someone should really send Michael Caine a memo about commas.
And titles, I guess, since he seems to think the movie is called "The Joker".
Michael Caine has website? It's a great thing to be able to read about his love of gardening and watching football and wimbledon on his new HDTV...
Exclusive: Nolan's Dark Knight Revelations
Helmer also talks The Prisoner.
IGN attended "An Evening With Christopher Nolan" on Oct. 2 at the historic Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood, where Nolan's first feature, Following, was screened along with the trailer for the filmmaker's next release, The Prestige.
Nolan and his wife-producer Emma Thomas were in attendance for a Q&A session after the film. The director's brother Jonah Nolan, who is scripting The Dark Knight, was also there but he did not take questions from the audience.
IGN got the chance to ask Chris Nolan if The Dark Knight would delve further into the themes established in Batman Begins, specifically the idea of justice vs. revenge and the exploration of Bruce Wayne's father issues.
"I haven't finished the script yet. I'm supposed to be doing it right now," Nolan admitted, sparking laughter from the crowd. "It does, absolutely. It's a pretty direct continuation of where the last film left off, and the last scene of Batman Begins suggests a strong direction we wanted to take the story in. It absolutely carries on with a lot of the thematic concerns and hopefully takes it someplace new."
When we asked if District Attorney Harvey Dent – a.k.a. Batman's future nemesis Two-Face – would indeed be in the film, Nolan replied, "I don't want to go into too many specifics. Yes, he is."
IGN caught up with Nolan as he was exiting the event and asked if Dent had been cast. "Not yet." Would that actor be an American, an Aussie or a Brit? "You'll see," Nolan promised.
Nolan was also asked during the event about his plans to direct the big-screen version of the TV classic, The Prisoner.
"I could but I'd really be pulling it out of my arse right now. [laughs] The Prisoner is something I've been interested in for quite a long time, and I think I've figured out the take on how we'd approach it," Nolan explained. "The relevance of it today. David and Janet Peoples are terrific, who you know wrote Blade Runner and Twelve Monkeys, all kinds of great movies. They're working on the script right now. I wouldn't want to speak for them. I'm very excited to see what they've come up with."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Batman on Film posted a transcript in their forums part of an interview with Heath Ledger that talks about Batman: Dark Knight.
In the transcript, aside from its lack of punctuation, Ledger makes some really bold statements that just build a LOT of anticipation for this movie. His take on Joker sounds like it will be fresh and new, but still true to the character, even holding a lot to the look of the Joker (pale skin, green hair) and he even addresses the people who doubt him as the pick for the Joker and he does it with class.
On his getting the coveted role of the Joker...
"You have to remember I watched those films as a boy and me and my mates used to play batman in the streets, so ive kinda had a knowledge of the charactors and the mythos, Ive wanted to do somthing that could cement me and after viewing Batman Begins I was interested in working with Nolan. When i was contacted i was not super keen on the idea but after learning about the things they wanted to do I became very interested in the Joker. Its an actors dream to play an icon role and the joker is so far removed from anything ive done yet that i am looking forward to it and to the ideas that were presented to me....
On what kind of Joker charactor angle can we expect to see...
"well this is just in the infant stages right now but i recieve charactor data from the writers on almost a weekly basis, my fax is loaded with profiles on the joker to give me an idea of what they are gonna do, ive also been given some of the comic book material to look over and I just become more interested as it developes, to play a villian one must throw it all out the window, and i have not yet really explored that kind of dark side, which makes me enthusiastic to play him, this role i am told will be like watching a car wreck that wont stop, and from the script peices ive been sent on my charactors angles, its just gets deeper and deeeper. This guy is a shark, a fearless shark and i know i can bring that alive....
On what the joker will look like...
That is my question as well, i suppose he will look like me, but ive been told that they are still in prelimanary stages and ive seen no ideas yet, ive been told it will be the joker and that the iconic look will be true, i hope it is....
On working with Bale...
Christain is actually in this film i am doing now on Bob Dylan so ive met him a few times, he is excited as well and that has galvanised me to do it too, he had alot to do with them contacting me, right now we are focused on this film but once we get to warner it will be all Dark Knight....
On the fans who dont like him...
This kind of things affects me zero, it would not matter who is chosen to play the charactor in any film, there is always someone who does not like you and I am secure in my chioces and my record, and if i must say anything directly to them it is that I am going to do the best possible work i can do as an actor, but i know at the end of the day you are never going to please anyone 100 percent, as an entertainer i chose what i want to do based on where i want to go, i am an actor and its my job to do this, but its a dream. I am greatful for getting the role and I have to say i will do whatever it takes to make it the best possible product i can..
On the jack nicholson joker...
That was a film i watched with my mates coming up, to say it was not a great film would be an understatement..i loved and was scared of the joker in that film so its very inspiring that ill be in those shoes, but at the same time what we are gonna have to do is somthing never done before, that was one of my requirements, i refused to carbon copy a perfeormance, that would not be a challenge and it would be mocking mr nicholson whom i have much respect for....
On what it will feel like to be an action figure...
Ive always thought that would be the point where i really made it, i mean i am an action packed guy so making a toy fo me is ok with me mates...
The "Challenge" of The Joker
Nolan talks Dark Knight casting.
Director Christopher Nolan has been talking to the press a lot lately as his new film, The Prestige, approaches its Oct. 20 release date. But the filmmaker seems to be answering as many questions about his next project, The Dark Knight, as he is about his forthcoming release.
Nolan was recently asked about the offbeat casting of Oscar nominee Heath Ledger as the Bat-sequel's villain, The Joker. "He's just exactly the kind of energy I needed for the character," Nolan told SciFi.com.
He continued, "Everything about the risks that that performer is willing to take are the things I need for somebody to take on that iconic figure. It's going to be a huge challenge for us to create it, and he's exactly the guy you want to be in the trenches with."
In related news, Batman Begins co-composer Hans Zimmer has confirmed that he'll reprise scoring duties for the sequel. In an interview with Soundtrack.net, Zimmer revealed, "Well, once I've done the next Batman movie, which will finish in early 2008, I thought I'd take a year off from writing film scores and just go and do some concerts."
Dark Knight Casting Buzz
The latest rumored Harvey Dent contender.
Another day, another Dark Knight rumor. Now that The Joker has been cast, the rumor mill has been buzzing about who will portray D.A. Harvey Dent (a.k.a. the man who will be Two-Face) in The Dark Knight, the sequel to Batman Begins.
Just weeks after Ryan Phillippe dismissed talk that he was up for the role, Batman-on-Film.com claims that a new, heretofore unreported actor may be a contender to portray Dent.
According to a longtime "friend" of Batman-on-Film.com, Ethan Hawke (Assault on Precinct 13, Training Day) is up for the role of "a lawyer" in the Warner Bros. project. At 36, Hawke is about the right age for the young, doomed D.A.
Hawke's credits include Lord of War, Before Sunrise, Gattaca, Dead Poets Society, Reality Bites and Hamlet. He will next be seen in Richard Linklater's Fast Food Nation.
The Dark Knight is slated to begin filming early next year for a 2008 release.
HEATH LEDGER TALKS JOKER
by Daniel Robert Epstein
I recently got the chance to talk with Heath Ledger at a press roundtable for the movie Candy. While on the hot seat I got the chance to grill Ledger about his upcoming role of The Joker in The Dark Knight.
Daniel Robert Epstein: Have you started to think about how you will play The Joker?
Heath Ledger: Yeah. I've been trying to delay my commitment to the preparation process on that because I'm trying to extend my holiday time. I definitely have an image in my head. I definitely have something up my sleeve. I want to be very sinister. It's so early that I'm trying to be open at this point. I don't want to be glued down to anyone.
DRE: Have you read many Batman comics?
HL: No and I think that's kind of helping me a little bit. I was never really a fan of comic books or comic book movies. I never despised them but I was never one to read them. I never sought out the films but I would sit down and enjoy them. So because of that I really feel that I'm not carrying much pressure.
DRE: Have they given or asked you to read certain comics?
HL: The Killing Joke was the one that was handed to me. I think it's going to be the beginning of The Joker. I guess that book explains a little bit of where he's from but not too much. From what I've gathered, there isn't a lot of information about The Joker and it's left that way.
DRE: Is doing the role of The Joker scary after Jack Nicholson did it so well?
HL: I'm not going for the same thing he went for. That would be stupid. It is also two very different directors with different styles. Tim Burton did a more fantastical kind of thing and Chris Nolan is doing nitty gritty handheld realism. I love what [Jack] did and that is part of why I want to do that role. I remember seeing it and thinking how much fun it would be to put on that mask and attempt to do something along those lines. But it would obviously be murder if I tried to imitate what he did.
DRE: They're talking about bringing in the co-creator of The Joker, Jerry Robinson, as a consultant on The Dark Knight. I don't know if it would be more of an honorary title.
HL: It probably is [laughs].
DRE: Have you ever wanted to do superhero movies before?
HL: Not really. With the tights and undies and the boots, I would just feel stupid and silly. I couldn't pull it off and there are other people who can perfectly. But I just couldn't take myself seriously. I feel like this is an opportunity to be in one and not do that. I just gravitated towards the villain role because I felt I had something to give to it. I instantly had an idea.
DRE: Have you done screen tests with The Joker makeup yet?
HL: No, but I did do 3-D image scanning. I don't know what they're doing with it. This Bat truck turned up at my place in L.A.. It had these gadgets and cameras that zoom around you and up and down you. It instantly projects a three dimensional image of you. I've never used anything that high tech before in a film. I felt like I was in the truck from Knight Rider.
Exclusive: Casting News On The Dark Knight
Source: Latino Review
After much speculation on the web, I got some news concerning casting on THE DARK KNIGHT, the sequel to BATMAN BEGINS!
We gave the world the first look at the script review for BATMAN BEGINS 3 years ago so it goes without saying that my information is solid concerning this project. I don't get my information from any publicists, like other people do, those folks get spoon fed and believe me you expect other sites to start calling their peeps at WB to find out if this is true....Like they will ever tell you the truth.
So that being said...
It's official (no surprise), HARVEY DENT is in THE DARK KNIGHT. Matt Damon passed on the role. The filmmakers met Josh Lucas and there is an interest in Jamie Foxx and Ed Norton. I'm pretty sure there are other actors that I'm not aware of up for the Harvey Dent role.
Now the big news is that the character of RACHEL DAWES is back in THE DARK KNIGHT but Katie Holmes won't be playing her!
No surprise there.
She is being replaced and the filmmakers are looking for that actress now. Let the speculation begin...
Some other minor roles...
Eastern European Heavy - tough bad guy mobster, 40s-50s
Female Cop - Latin, 30s. Elizabeth Pena type.
Asian Accountant - male, 40s
Sounds like a lot of diversity in the sequel!
Also according to Production Weekly, the film has been in pre-production as of January 11th.
Lastly there is no Oswald Cobblepot AKA The Penguin in THE DARK KNIGHT.
Quote from: MacGuffin on January 26, 2007, 01:18:39 AM
Female Cop - Latin, 30s. Elizabeth Pena type.
I love how they put "Elizabeth Pena type", as though Elizabeth Pena herself is out of their league.
Her age is.
Batman wears Prada?
Source: Moviehole
Rising newcomer Emily Blunt ("The Devil Wears Prada") is rumoured [this week, anyway] to be in line to replace Katie Holmes for the forthcoming "The Dark Knight", reports Cinema Blend.
The site heard from a "reliable" scooper who let slip that the folks behind the upcoming second "Batman" jaunt are in big fat gushy love with the actress, and want her to take over the role that Holmes (who quit the part recently) originated in "Batman Begins".
The site says that "Our same anonymous source insists that Katie didn't leave the project, but was dropped. Anything you've heard otherwise is just PR spin to save face. Of course, anyone with half a brain could have figured that out. You don't intentionally ditch a recurring role in Batman to star in a crappy romantic comedy with Queen Latifah. Nobody, not even Katie Holmes, is that stupid.
"For now though, just pencil this in as a wild rumor. My source is one that's been right before, yet even if this is true it only means that Emily Blunt is being considered for the part of Rachel Dawes. It doesn't mean she has it. Sit back and wait for Nolan to make up his mind."
i truly don't understand replacing her because she married tom cruise. her performance wasn't so bad she needed to be replaced either. is there a reason i'm missing?
Quote from: picolas on February 01, 2007, 02:31:53 AM
i truly don't understand replacing her because she married tom cruise. her performance wasn't so bad she needed to be replaced either. is there a reason i'm missing?
Maybe it was her choice??
It'll be interesting to see how quickly The Dark Knight picks up after Batman Begins. You'd think that Batman would try and track down the Joker immediately after being aware of him. But maybe they'll have some sort of prior history established before the movie takes place?
Latino Review says, "Maggie Gyllenhaal will be the new Rachel Dawes!"
They sound confident. They had two sources. I'm happy with the choice.
Katie Holmes wasn't bad. She just wasn't very popular. Even people outside caring about her public controversy, like my dad, found her annoying in the movie.
Katie wasn't bad, she was just wildly miscast. Gyllenhall's still a weird choice, but at least you get the sense from her that she could have made it through law school.
Quote from: polkablues on February 14, 2007, 07:38:01 PM
Gyllenhall's still a weird choice, but at least you get the sense from her that she could have made it through law school.
plus she looks like a cat. so there's that.
Eckhart joining 'Dark Knight' cast
Source: Hollywood Reporter
Aaron Eckhart is in final negotiations to play Harvey Dent/Two Face in "The Dark Knight," Warner Bros. Pictures' sequel to "Batman Begins."
In Batman lore, Dent is the district attorney of Gotham City and an ally of Batman. After half his face is disfigured by acid, Dent becomes the insane crime boss known as Two Face. He chooses to do good or evil by flipping a coin. Tommy Lee Jones played the character in 1995's "Batman Forever."
"Knight" sees Christopher Nolan back in the director's chair with Christian Bale reprising his role as Bruce Wayne/Batman. Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine and Gary Oldman are also returning. Heath Ledger joined the cast last summer, signing up to play the sardonic and murderous villain the Joker.
The script was written by Nolan's brother, Jonathan, from a story by Christopher Nolan and David Goyer. Producing are Emma Thomas, Charles Roven and Christopher Nolan.
Eckhart is riding high these days thanks to his acclaimed performance in "Thank You for Smoking," which nabbed him Golden Globe and Spirit Award nominations. He next stars opposite Catherine Zeta-Jones in "No Reservations," the U.S. remake of the 2001 German feature "Mostly Martha." The film will be released by Warners in July. He is also starring in the "Untitled Alan Ball Project," Ball's directorial debut.
Quote from: Pubrick on February 15, 2007, 12:50:44 AM
Quote from: polkablues on February 14, 2007, 07:38:01 PM
Gyllenhall's still a weird choice, but at least you get the sense from her that she could have made it through law school.
plus she looks like a cat. so there's that.
I think she looks like a St. Bernard.
Looks like all the sites are confirming Eckhart as Dent now, too.
Quote from: Derek on February 15, 2007, 04:55:20 PM
Quote from: Pubrick on February 15, 2007, 12:50:44 AM
Quote from: polkablues on February 14, 2007, 07:38:01 PM
Gyllenhall's still a weird choice, but at least you get the sense from her that she could have made it through law school.
plus she looks like a cat. so there's that.
I think she looks like a St. Bernard.
Let's compare:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi35.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fd179%2Fpolkablues%2FMaggie20Gyllenhaal20Cheryl20Shuman.jpg&hash=783698e594f5b0805d23df4d3e5ade39d8c34e1f) = (https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi35.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fd179%2Fpolkablues%2Fscottish.jpg&hash=b85f06a69a54f57c9d80772e41c8e0c7df5160c3)?
or
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi35.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fd179%2Fpolkablues%2FMaggie20Gyllenhaal20Cheryl20Shuman.jpg&hash=783698e594f5b0805d23df4d3e5ade39d8c34e1f) = (https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi35.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fd179%2Fpolkablues%2Fm_6131383.jpg&hash=3984dba8112d7e30f5e6da32d1c238502cdafb2b)?
But at least there's one thing that's for certain:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi35.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fd179%2Fpolkablues%2Fportret_hitler_rechten-Ver.jpg&hash=d51bb6105892ada7cfbffbc1eda5c8323a706825) = (https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi35.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fd179%2Fpolkablues%2Fkitler720.jpg&hash=1d1f5d2a8df7a70444c3e3717449141cec0d57b2).
Batman Villain Two-Face Speaks: Eckhart Reveals 'Dark Knight' Details
Will Two-Face show his bad side in 'The Dark Knight'? Bruce Wayne's frienemy may have said too much.
Source: MTV
SANTA MONICA, California — Two-Face may have a horribly scarred visage, but recently confirmed star Aaron Eckhart was all smiles as he discussed his plans for Harvey Dent in "The Dark Knight," Christopher Nolan's sequel to the hit "Batman Begins."
"I am excited. Christopher Nolan is an amazing director," Eckhart told MTV News. "It's another movie that's a dream come true."
Most villains have a hidden alter ego — Harvey Dent sports his in plain view as the twisted and deformed Two-Face, enemy to Batman and terror of Gotham City.
Gotham City's youngest-ever district attorney, Harvey Dent, is permanently scarred when a criminal throws sulfuric acid in his face, resulting in a burn that leaves the entire left side of his body mutilated beyond repair.
Unable to cope with his deformity, Dent's long-repressed anger surfaces, creating a split personality and a battle for his overall instincts. On one side lies the good Harvey Dent, friend to Bruce Wayne. On the other, Two-Face, master criminal and enemy to Batman. Tommy Lee Jones most recently portrayed the villain in 1995's "Batman Forever."
According to Eckhart, it's a dichotomy and depth of character that matches Bruce Wayne's own transformation from millionaire playboy to crime-fighting vigilante.
"Batman is a complex character, and Two-Face comes a little bit from the same world," Eckhart insisted. "But [at the same time] he's apart from it."
Eckhart reported that the key to playing Two-Face, then, is finding specifically how he mirrors — and where he differs — from the Caped Crusader.
"I'm looking for the tension between the two, the similarities between the two," Eckhart said of his portrayal. "I want to find what's similar to Batman and then find what's opposite to him."
Two-Face flips a coin to decide how he's going to act. But will Eckhart even get the chance? Rumors persist that Eckhart's role as Dent will set him up as the main villain in the series' third installment, with his disfigurement coming toward the end of the second film.
Is Eckhart exclusively Harvey Dent in "The Dark Knight"?
"Yeah," Eckhart said, before reconsidering after a brief pause, "Well, I'm Harvey Dent ... then I go into Harvey Two-Face."
And what of speculation that, in this new installment, it's going to be the Joker (played by Heath Ledger) who scars the eager district attorney?
"I think I'll be killed [if I comment on that] — I'm not even sure I can say as much as I have," Eckhart joked as a wicked, Dent-ian smile broke across his face. "There are snipers looking at me right now!
"I'm looking forward to going to London and Chicago to shoot [the film]," the "Thank You for Smoking" star added.
Fans will have a long time to look forward to Eckhart's portrayal — "The Dark Knight" opens in the summer of 2008.
Gyllenhaal joining Batman sequel
Actress taking Holmes role in 'Dark Knight'
Source: Variety
Maggie Gyllenhaal is in final talks to star opposite Christian Bale in Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight," the next installment in the revitalized Batman franchise. She'll play the role of Rachel Dawes, played by Katie Holmes in "Batman Begins." Holmes dropped out of the project earlier in the year.
Nolan is set to begin lensing in the late spring or early summer. Pic is eying a summer 2008 release.
Producers are Emma Thomas, Charles Roven and Nolan.
Legendary Pictures and Warner are co-financing partners on the project.
Gyllenhaal, a new mother, was most recently in theaters with "Stranger Than Fiction" and "World Trade Center."
I dont like that... she is a terrific actress and pretty... but she is not as hot as maybe Michele Pfeiffer, Nicole Kidman, Uma Thurman or Kim Bassinger, who have played the Batman-girl role.
I trust Nolan so lets see... for a second I thought it was Jake Gyllenhaal... which would have been great but also would start a millions of Brokeback discussions everywhere.
ok well rachel is back.
it's good because, it gets really old having to invent a new love interest every film, it's not james bond. if we can avoid julie madison and dr. chase meridian, that will be just great. i like maggie, i'm sort of interested to see how she works with this cast and bale in particular and in a film with this tone so fingers crossed.
but this is bad because i'm really not sure where they can go with her character and this relationship. like i said, i hope its tragic because she's aware that he's batman and now what? it's also bad because even though katie holmes was snoozeville, she wasnt horrible and i'd almost rather have her back than recast the role because i HATE messing up the continuity in a series like this! FUCK.
She has to die. Not because I don't like Gyllenhaal (because I do), but for there to be any dramatic satisfaction out of that character, she has to die. Somewhere around the midpoint would be fine.
Who's That Joker?
Rumors about the Clown Prince's look in Dark Knight.
With The Dark Knight reportedly set to begin filming in London shortly, it won't be long before Heath Ledger finally steps before cameras as the new Joker. But what the Oscar-nominated Aussie will look like as the Clown Prince of Crime has been one of the big questions that fans have been wondering about. Now there are a few rumors online about what that look may be.
Although they later updated their initial report to emphasize that this is not the final design, Batman-on-Film.com has been informed by a scooper that Ledger's Joker "will have gray skin with lots of scarring."
Furthermore, Joker will reportedly wear "raggedy" garb, which jives with earlier rumors that his outfit will be more like something he's thrown together than a costume per se.
Director Christopher Nolan is said to be going for a "scary" Joker rather than a clownish one, which would be in line with the realistic approach he took with villains Ra's Al Ghul and The Scarecrow in Batman Begins.
BoF adds that Warner Bros. will likely release an official image of Ledger as The Joker this summer to ward off spy snapshots from leaking out.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fprofile.ak.facebook.com%2Fobject%2F369%2F58%2Fn2207812759_37796.jpg&hash=413a11b9768c411e7aab151580c0ee7ff4dfdf76)
Nice fake, that's been out for months, but there are some really blurry shitty shots of Ledger on the net now.
found a real/non blurry one:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpowet.tv%2Fwordpress%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2006%2F07%2Fledgerjoker.jpg&hash=ea947772a96e516f7aae1fe67b7cb12371c51191)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi35.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fd179%2Fpolkablues%2F2182-joker2.jpg&hash=a58b3c60eab4e9435de1a2ebbbb6ea3933b07d49)
Supposedly from a makeup test. Also supposedly Ledger. Possibly a stand-in. Definitely ripping off "The Crow" a little.
BREAKING: Cinematical Has Confirmed -- The Crow Joker Is Phony
A well-placed source who should know -- they absolutely won't allow me to say more -- has just gotten back to me after doing some checking, and they are telling me that the make-up test photo of Heath Ledger from this morning -- the one that AICN is standing behind as the real deal -- is, in fact, a complete "fake." There was no ambiguity there. This confirms my original suspicion, given that the photo looks nothing like Heath Ledger and we all know that nothing is as highly-guarded as the look of a character like this in a film like The Dark Knight. At this point, I'm starting to think that Warner Bros. is sitting around laughing at us for giving them all kinds of free publicity, confident in the knowledge that we actually haven't seen anything yet. Either way, Heath Ledger isn't going to be able to go out for a hamburger from now on without people following him around, hoping to get a snap of him with a tinge of green in his hair.
isnt that Vince Fro?
that's obviously His Infernal Majesty's lead singer Ville Valo.
not even worth posting an image
The Pope of Gotham Village
Roberts joins Dark Knight cast.
There's a new gangster in Gotham City and his name is Eric Roberts. The veteran actor -- and brother of Julia -- has reportedly joined the cast of Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight, the sequel to Batman Begins that is now filming in Chicago.
According to the L.A. Daily News, Roberts will "play a Mafia kingpin" and is expected to join the film in June. After beginning his career with films such as The Pope of Greenwich Village and Star 80, Roberts has found steadier success these days on TV with roles on series such as Heroes and The L Word.
Roberts is no stranger to gangster roles, having portrayed several of them during his long career in films such as The Specialist and Heaven's Prisoners. He's also familiar with genre fare, having appeared in Doctor Who and D.O.A.: Dead or Alive, as well as lending his voice to the Justice League cartoon.
Batman-on-Film.com suspects that Roberts may play Gotham crimelord Sal Maroni, the gangster infamous for scarring D.A. Harvey Dent and turning him into Two-Face.
In other Bat-news, screenwriter David Goyer, who hatched the plot for The Dark Knight along with director Nolan, advised MTV.com that the sequel will further explore ideas planted at the end of the first film.
"The last scene of Batman Begins tells you where things are going to go in the next movie. That was very intentional. We paved the way. For people interested in where the next movie is going to go, watch that scene again," said Goyer, adding, "Escalation [is the theme of TDK]. Escalation is certainly [the biggest theme]."
Christian Bale on The Dark Knight
Source: SuperHero Hype!
Since taking on the mantle of Bruce Wayne and Batman for the 2005 summer blockbuster Batman Begins, Christian Bale has become one of the more respected actors to take on the role, but before starting work on its sequel, The Dark Knight, Bale went to work with German filmmaker Werner Herzog on his latest dramatic film Rescue Dawn. Bale took a break from shooting The Dark Knight to talk to press about the Herzog film, but he took some time to answer a few questions from ComingSoon.net/Superhero Hype! about the sequel-in-progress.
Superhero Hype!: You seem like an actor who is always looking to do something new, so how hard is it for you to go back and play Batman, a character you've already done? Is there something new you feel you can bring to him?
Christian Bale: You got to see with the other versions, it didn't really keep it going, but Chris Nolan who I'm working with for the third time now, he ain't going to be making a movie if he's not going to be doin' something very different with it which he's achieved in spades. I'm actually liking very much the idea, because I haven't reprised a role before, so I know it already and obviously there'll be progress. We've got a great cast as well. Chris and me work very well together, so I know we'll be fighting an awful lot to add to it. The last thing it is is treading water. Now the people support us completely too so we have all that extra support behind us, to just kind of let rip.
SHH: As an actor, how important is it to have a franchise character that you can go back to which allows you to do things like this movie?
Bale: Well, I've been doing things like this movie anyway. It's not like if I didn't have the franchise, I'd say, "No I can't make Rescue Dawn." What it does allow though is that something like "Rescue Dawn" you know Werner and me have been talking about making it for two and a half years, but I doubt it's a huge coincidence that we got the finance pretty quick after I'd been in "Batman." So it does mean that I can do these things in a much easier fashion verses a number of years back where like "American Psycho 2," it took two years, just because they didn't want me. Certainly it helps with that, but in and of itself, I really like what Chris has done and working with him on "Batman." I tell you, it's the only time in my life that I've been actually planning the future, because usually you know what you're doing for the next two months if you're lucky. After that, you have no idea. I've gone times when I've really needed to work, and there was no work coming in for me. I didn't work for a year and a half or something. I guess having a franchise is the only time you can actually kind of sit back and go, "It's alright. It's going to be okay." Even if nothing else happens, I know that that's going to come along at some point. You don't even know that actually because they could dump me in a second. But, it's a good bit.
SHH: Can you talk about your training for the upcoming film?
Bale: There are new things that I'm having to train for, but again just in the same way that we kind of were untested before, they know I know my right from my left now. They know when I walk, my arm swings the right way and everything. There's a little bit more confidence in me about my ability to pick things up quickly. We did start awhile back which I believe is a mystery for what we are training for.
SHH: How about working with Heath as The Joker?
Bale: Absolutely. He's a great choice for it. I like him personally, but he's got a real craving for playing that role. I think he's going to do something really very different. We worked together briefly in the Todd Haynes movie.
http://thedarkknight.warnerbros.com/
whoa, a fucking graphic...
:roll:
am i the only one who thinks these batman movies are total bullshit? honestly, i could care less. whereas burton's movies gave the series a darker tone (as opposed to the tv show), certain humor and camp elements still remained, and i could both laugh at and be in awe of the films. the chris nolan movie just robbed batman of all the fun. to me, it was just just a hollow rehash of characters that i've seen before and liked better. and i don't understand why chris nolan is just pimping himself out to the studios to make fucking batman movies. this is the man who made memento! that movie was so creative and different, a real breath of fresh air, and then he goes out to make $100 million "reimaginings."
wait, nevermind, i haven't seen the prestige yet. i don't know if i should bash nolan or not.
yeah, you know what, that movie has bowie, i'm sure it's good, i don't even need to see it. i guess it's just politics, the way that burton made scissorhands in between the first two batman movies. pet projects in between studio bullshit.
still though, i don't like boring batman movies and i don't care whether or not i see the new one when it comes out.
I think the Nolan Batman is the best one. It's ALMOST perfect. It builds up with villain, after villain, and each one more dangerous than the last, but not in a cheesy way, in a realistic way.
This is the movie I was most looking forward to, but now that that ugly, no talent disgrace of a tabloid/press seeker Maggie Gylenwhatever is in it I'm pissed. You all got those actors that you just can't stand. She's mine.
Quote from: bonanzataz on May 12, 2007, 05:29:04 PM
am i the only one who thinks these batman movies are total bullshit?
whoa, a fucking graphic statement...
:roll:
I'm kinda with Taz. I use to love the Nolan series, but multiple viewings have been tough and I'm now reminsciencing for what Burton did with the first one. Not the second because that was the beginning of the silly.
The problem with the Nolan series is that that the storytelling tries to do too much. Multiple stories were covered in Batman Begins. Nolan tried to connect the story with Bruce Wayne's beginnings to his later struggles as Batman that involved subplots and multiple villians. The storytelling had to become explanatory to cover all bases. Because Nolan is adapting a comic book, he is adapting a lot of story. Other filmmakers have felt beholden to the comic book legacy to do the same. While I have not seen Spiderman 3, the trailer itself is very explanatory.
Burton, in good ignorance, showed little regard for comic book legacy. He adapted Batman to the film world to operate on the levels that were best for film. Batman is a nightmare conveyed and The Joker is societal madness. The only subplot is a romance with Kim Basinger. The film works on the strengths of Nicholson and Keaton in their roles.
Quote from: pozer on May 13, 2007, 03:34:35 PM
Quote from: bonanzataz on May 12, 2007, 05:29:04 PM
am i the only one who thinks these batman movies are total bullshit?
whoa, a fucking graphic statement...
:roll:
yeah, backed with statements and opinions, not just a photoshopped version of some stupid familiar logo. movies are just brand names now.
I've said that since day one. even burton's batman was really boring to me, but I still didn't understand why people dug it. it was as dark as spiderman 3, just with slicker photography. nothing in it really stood out. batman was boring, bruce wayne was boring, the action was boring, the score was boring...etc. the movie had no depth nor fun. that's the problem with the batman series since day one. it was never as thriling as the other superheroes, but it was still a DC franchise. I guess batman: year one was a good comicbook.
Quote from: bonanzataz on May 13, 2007, 05:17:55 PM
movies are just brand names now.
welcome to planet earth (brought to you by t-mobile) :)
QuoteBurton, in good ignorance, showed little regard for comic book legacy.
he did that deliberately. "Anybody who knows me knows I would never read a comic book. And I certainly would never read anything written by Kevin Smith."
so you and tim burton share an unfair disregard for comic books.
the fact is that batman begins was one of the rare occations where a comic book was taken with a bit of seriousness, and the worlds of cinema and comic books converged, and fans of both mediums like myself felt very pleased. nolan's achievement in batman begins, to me, resides in the fact that, as dumb as it sounds, he took simple elements of the batman myth and turned them into a batman movie, like when a translator translates a poem. before batman begins, all the superhero movies i'd seen where flashy and colorful and had fake special effects that killed the whole concept of hiring real people to play the hero himself. like what they did in spider-man. there's just like 4 shots in those movies where you can kind of believe you're watching a superhero in action. batman begins had
a pulse. what they did with gotham city should be enough to appreciate it. it wasn't just a bunch of gray cardboard meets art deco bullshit, it looked like a really unhealthy city. i still think it's a triumph that batman begins exists in the hollywood universe. it's such an anomaly.
i have hopes for this movie because even if they've said that the killing joke is serving as an inspiration for the story, they're just going to take what they need from that book ,which is not a very good story anyways, look for other resources, and create an updated, better Joker.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmoviesmedia.ign.com%2Fmovies%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F789%2F789334%2Fibelieve-in-harveydent_1179437328-000.jpg&hash=b1495b953b9e2dc3231548cc186a6548b09b6f8c)
Do You Believe in Harvey Dent?
And Carbonell elected mayor of Gotham City.
The official film site for The Dark Knight has been updated with a special new feature. If you click on the Bat-logo on the site's main page, it takes you to a political campaign ad for Harvey Dent, the Gotham City district attorney played in the film by Aaron Eckhart.
The ad declares Dent's candidacy for the office of District Attorney with the slogan, "I Believe in Harvey Dent." It also features the first official image of Eckhart as Dent.
With filming now under way on The Dark Knight, director Christopher Nolan has been filling the supporting roles in his sequel to Batman Begins. Nestor Carbonell (Lost, Smokin' Aces) will play the mayor of Gotham City in the film. Ironically, Carbonell is also known to fanboys as "Batmanuel" from his days on The Tick.
Variety announced Carbonell's casting as they also belatedly confirmed the casting of Heroes' Eric Roberts as a Mafia crime boss. The New York Post says Roberts plays Sal Maroni, the hood responsible for scarring D.A. Harvey Dent and turning him into Two-Face.
In related casting news, MTV.com reports that "rapper/actor David Banner auditioned this week for a role in The Dark Knight. ... According to the beefy Black Snake Moan supporting actor, he would play a villain named 'Gamble,' another criminal to help fill out the rogue ranks alongside Heath Ledger's Joker."
Finally, Batman-on-Film.com claims that the character of Gotham police commissioner Loeb (played by Colin McFarlane in Batman Begins) will be back for The Dark Knight.
Quote from: cronopio on May 13, 2007, 06:06:24 PM
QuoteBurton, in good ignorance, showed little regard for comic book legacy.
he did that deliberately. "Anybody who knows me knows I would never read a comic book. And I certainly would never read anything written by Kevin Smith."
so you and tim burton share an unfair disregard for comic books.
the fact is that batman begins was one of the rare occations where a comic book was taken with a bit of seriousness, and the worlds of cinema and comic books converged, and fans of both mediums like myself felt very pleased. nolan's achievement in batman begins, to me, resides in the fact that, as dumb as it sounds, he took simple elements of the batman myth and turned them into a batman movie, like when a translator translates a poem. before batman begins, all the superhero movies i'd seen where flashy and colorful and had fake special effects that killed the whole concept of hiring real people to play the hero himself. like what they did in spider-man. there's just like 4 shots in those movies where you can kind of believe you're watching a superhero in action. batman begins had a pulse. what they did with gotham city should be enough to appreciate it. it wasn't just a bunch of gray cardboard meets art deco bullshit, it looked like a really unhealthy city. i still think it's a triumph that batman begins exists in the hollywood universe. it's such an anomaly.
i have hopes for this movie because even if they've said that the killing joke is serving as an inspiration for the story, they're just going to take what they need from that book ,which is not a very good story anyways, look for other resources, and create an updated, better Joker.
It is true, I don't very much care for comic books or graphic novels. I read a book for Sin City and couldnt have been more bored, but that's just me.
I don't think Batman Begins was any great merging either. The film was more realistic than either Spiderman or the original Batman, yes, but it had all of the problems that many super hero movies have (regardless of whether they are faithful or not to comic books), it tried to fit too many characters into the confines of one story. I wasn't sure if it was trying to act like a comic book or a novel. The hope for Dark Knight is that the story will be more intimate and focused, but all these cast signings are making me think otherwise. But I still hope for the best.
The one film I'd say that did great by bringing the feeling of comic books to film is Dark City.
The film is dense with edits, but every shot is perfectly framed. Unlike film, there are barely any shots that go on for an extended period of time. The camera does not pan or signifcantly follow a character. If it does so, it is interrupted with numerous cuts, like a comic book would. It tells the story and action in the motion of shots.
Also, the world is as much a character as the character themeselves. Like comic books, it explains the identity and nature of a world with its different rules and regulations like a comic book would that had make a super hero believable. Some comic books deal with real situations, but the story of Dark City very much follows the traditional science fiction story in older comic books.
See, Batman Begins has numerous filmmaking techniques that couldn't be replicated to perciseness in a comic book. It takes on many intangibles that are unique to filmmaking, but you say it merges both worlds together so that means it doesn't have to be a thorough dedication. The only complaint about Dark City is that its editing is so complicated that no comic book could be so percise with the action. But the film does shame lackluster attempts like 300 and Sin City to replicate the barebone imagery of graphic novels.
While not the biggest fan of 300 or Sin City, I wouldn't call them 'lackluster attempts'. Personally, those two films were the first times I even entertained the idea of comics working well in cinema. I don't think they are the end of a line, but I think they were glimpses of something that could end up being rather interesting.
Quote from: martinthewarrior on May 18, 2007, 03:44:20 PM
While not the biggest fan of 300 or Sin City, I wouldn't call them 'lackluster attempts'. Personally, those two films were the first times I even entertained the idea of comics working well in cinema. I don't think they are the end of a line, but I think they were glimpses of something that could end up being rather interesting.
They mimic the captions of the graphic novel to near duplication. They do not try to find an equivalent cinematically that forces them to use their imagination. The only thought that was used was which scenes to take, music to put in and what over-the-top camera shots can be forced in (referring to 300).
I'm betting money that these movies take us nowhere. More films will replicate the visuals in this movie and get the financial rewards and sooner or later audiences will be sick of them. Why? Because these movies will not branch out. They will continue to be representations of the surface of graphic novels and get lodged into a small niche. The niche will continue to entertain some, but since the productions are major expenses, when the general audience starts to flee so will the financing.
The Joker Believes in Harvey Dent Too!
Warner Bros. is really kicking-off the viral campaign for The Dark Knight early! In addition to the official website launching with a link to IBelieveinHarveyDent.com, the studio has also brought online a site made by the Joker. At IBelieveinHarveyDentToo.com, fans get a look at a defaced Harvey Dent image. But the cool thing is that you can enter your e-mail and a code. You'll receive an e-mail with a link and X and Y coordinates that will reveal one pixel from an image underneath!
http://www.ibelieveinharveydenttoo.com/
smaller version of mod's post (http://www.mywasteofspace.com/ibelieveinharveydenttoo.jpg)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aintitcool.com%2Fimages2007%2FJokerFinal.jpg&hash=8416250beeb2c1e400af1d75b4a10153901885a6)
:yabbse-thumbup:!
Wow.
Hall stays dead quiet about role in Batman saga
Source: Los Angeles Daily News
"Dead Zone" star Anthony Michael Hall reports the plot of the latest Batman saga, "The Dark Knight," is so secret he's forbidden to even say what character he's portraying.
"I signed a confidentiality agreement, and I can't say which part I'm playing because it affects the story," says Hall. "I can't give away the suspense — it's a $200 million surprise, and I don't want to be the guy to ruin it."
He adds, "I'm excited about it — Christian Bale back as Batman. Heath Ledger is joining the cast as the Joker. Of course, Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine return, and they're great."
Hall, who's in the midst of shooting the sixth season of "The Dead Zone," which returns to the USA Network June 17, says his TV series cast and crew bent over backward for him to be in London for the first day of "Dark Knight" production the weekend before last.
"My crew agreed to take a three-day weekend so I could fly Friday to go to London," says the actor, who's also one of the series' producers. "It was just a thrill. I felt like a rock star leaving the set, flying to London, going to shoot on a Saturday, you know?" He adds, "My crew really gave me a gift because they had to all vote union-wise to agree to not take a day's pay to help me out. I felt very honored that they did that for me."
He says he's not scheduled to rejoin "The Dark Knight" shooting till August, after "The Dead Zone" is wrapped. "They're shooting in London, Chicago and Hong Kong. My next dates are in Chicago, the third week of August with Morgan, then I get to go back to London." He adds he's never been a comic-book fan, but "I loved the 'Batman' series, so Batman has truly always meant something to me. It's really been one of my dreams as an actor to become Batman."
For now, he's just happy flying in the same airspace. "It's really a great role. I'm in throughout the whole movie, and I'm really looking forward to working with Christian and Morgan and all these real Hollywood heavy hitters."
i bet he's playing two-face's other face
The Joker Will See You in December!
Source: ComingSoon
The new image of Heath Ledger as The Joker in The Dark Knight has now been removed from IBelieveinHarveyDentToo.com. It's been replaced with red text that gives the error, "Page not found." If you highlight the entire page, however, you'll see a ton of Ha Ha Ha's with some letters here and there that don't belong. String those letters together and what do you get? - "See you in December."
We assume you'll get a first look at The Joker in a trailer for the sequel at that time. Warner Bros. has both Nicole Kidman's The Golden Compass and Will Smith's I Am Legend opening in December, to which the teaser could be attached to.
So who is behind all this? It looks to be 42 Entertainment, the company which previously created the "I Love Bees" promotion for "Halo 2" and "Year Zero" for the Nine Inch Nails album "Year Zero." The company just registered SeeYouinDecember.com yesterday, so stay tuned.
EXCLUSIVE PIC FROM THE SET
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg201.imageshack.us%2Fimg201%2F275%2Fbatmanserial1943xm9.jpg&hash=6f3f2bdaa47d3bd9881aa1a3d784e2627c63e822)
damn, looks like their got shia lebouf for this one too!!!! :yabbse-grin:
uh, no. it's ari tenenbaum
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.darkhorizons.com%2Fnews07%2Fji.jpg&hash=1ecaee4f96dcd19bf0097db674456cb1eef8fd73)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.usatoday.net%2Flife%2F_photos%2F2007%2F05%2F29%2Fdark-knight1x-large.jpg&hash=6698198398ed7c3716a610449ba7da43cbf33000)
'Dark Knight' heeds Imax signal
First major feature to have scenes shot in the format
Source: Hollywood Reporter
Director Christopher Nolan has made an inventive decision to film four sequences of "The Dark Knight" with Imax cameras. The next installment of Warner Bros. Pictures' Batman franchise, which again will star Christian Bale as Batman/Bruce Wayne, is scheduled for a July 18, 2008, day-and-date theatrical release with Imax theaters.
Although it is not unusual for 35mm-lensed features to be remastered to screen in Imax theaters, "Dark Knight" is the first major feature to be even partially shot using Imax cameras. These sequences will be combined with the rest of the film -- lensed in 35mm -- to produce the final product.
What the use of Imax technology in the production means for audiences in Imax theaters is that when the select scenes are shown, the aspect ratio will morph to the larger size, expanding the image to fill the entire screen. In traditional theaters, the goal is that the Imax-lensed sequences "would jump off screens ... and give patrons an experience they haven't seen in 35mm presentations," said Dan Fellman, Warner Bros. president of domestic distribution.
Following many months of testing, the first of the Imax-lensed scenes, including a prologue that introduces the Joker (Heath Ledger), was shot in Chicago last month, several weeks in advance of the actual start of principal photography. Additional scenes will be filmed with Imax cameras during the course of production.
Nolan said, "In continuing the story of such a great icon, I'm thrilled to be able to expand the scope of the film, not just in terms of its story, but in giving Batman and the Joker the largest possible canvas on which to face off. No existing technology compares with the Imax format in terms of its ability to throw the audience into the action, and we're very proud and excited to use this technology in a way that no one has before."
"Warner Bros. has always been committed to advancing the art of filmmaking," said Jeff Robinov, president of production at Warner Bros. Pictures. "The use of Imax cameras to film select scenes in an action feature is a great step forward in big-screen entertainment, especially in the talented hands of Christopher Nolan."
Greg Foster, chairman and president of Imax Filmed Entertainment, added that the application "will allow our crystal-clear images, 14,000 watts of digital surround sound, and screens up to eight stories tall to give Batman fans the most immersive cinematic experience in the world." He praised Nolan's vision, and the Warners/Imax relationship; he estimates that Warners has released roughly 20 Imax films to date.
Warners' "300" set an attendance record at Imax theaters in its opening weekend in March. Next month, the studio will release "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" in Imax, with the final 20 minutes of the film screening in stereoscopic 3-D.
Fellman expects at least three additional Imax releases from Warners to debut between the release of "Order of the Phoenix" and "Dark Knight." This would include a sequel -- currently in production -- to "Deep Sea 3-D."
"Dark Knight" will be presented by Warner Bros. Pictures in association with Legendary Pictures. The film will be distributed worldwide by Warner Bros. Pictures.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg2.timeinc.net%2Few%2Fdynamic%2Fimgs%2F070614%2Fbatman_l.jpg&hash=d41640d8a008c2347ddbf640165a1066d3306385)
Batman's New Suit
The Caped Crusader won't swoop onto screens again until ''The Dark Knight'' hits theaters on July 18, 2008 — but he's already sporting a new-and-improved getup, and costume designer Lindy Hemming gives EW a first look and tells us about its features
ABOUT THE COSTUME
HEAD GAMES Ever wonder why movie Batmans rarely turn their horned heads? It's because the cowls of past suits were firmly attached to the neck and shoulders of the costume — necessary to maintain that iconic silhouette and to prevent the actor from moving around inside the mask. The new headpiece — modeled after a motorcycle helmet — is separate from the neck, so star Christian Bale can now swivel his noggin side to side, or nod up and down. ''It was the hardest part of the suit to make,'' says Hemming.
CAPE FEAR Don't bother asking. ''It's top secret,'' says Hemming. Meaning...? ''Let's just say things happen to the cloak.'' Our guess: It's also a picnic blanket!
BLADES OF GLORY The razors on Batman's forearms are actually part of the suit. (His gloves tuck into the sleeves of the suit.) They're retractable, and yep, they're weapons. ''They shoot at people!'' says Hemming with a Jokersesque laugh.
RAW MATERIAL The new suit is made of 200 individual pieces of rubber, fiberglass, and nylon and metallic mesh. Bruce Wayne's work duds now have a stylish texture, suggesting they're made with sophisticated new technology. ''I thought it would make it more interesting to look at and wonder about,'' says Hemming, adding that the stretchy rubber lines also help bind the costume to Bale's body.
Ugh, does it have nipples?
Please don't fuck this up. The first one was 99% PERFECT. This one already has alot working against it with that beast of a disgrace of a hideous looking/acting human being in Maggie Gylenfuckyou.
Quote from: Stefen on June 15, 2007, 03:46:20 PM
Ugh, does it have nipples?
no.
though
Quote from: imdbAs a joke, one bat suit was made with nipples. It was presented to Christian Bale as the real bat suit, but he knew instantly it was a joke, having seen a few design pictures during preproduction. He did pose for some publicity photos in the "nipple" suit.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fmedia%2Falternatethumbnails%2Fstory%2F2007-06%2F30587677.jpg&hash=f3e1d0afab5ccec29210d00bc773c79772e98d94)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fmedia%2Fphoto%2F2007-06%2F30587348.jpg&hash=45c4e3b63f1ec20265dc7ed2b3983e9c1a184921)
Wholly high-tech, Batman
There's a wild new two-wheeler in the Batcave for 2008's 'Dark Knight.'
Source: Los Angeles Times
Yes, it's ridable. You just have to be a little bit crazy and entirely French to do it.
Specifically, you need to be Jean-Pierre Goy, the stunt rider who's spent the last few months jumping Batman's newest batbike at some top-secret location in England to prep for next summer's Bruce Wayne caper, "The Dark Knight," starring Christian Bale as the caped one.
Goy is the only person who's ridden the new Batpod — a bike so outrageous it's hard to believe it was even built. It's not just because it's tricked out with grappling hooks, cannons and machine guns. The front and rear tires are both a monstrously huge 508 millimeters, and the engines are in the hubs of each wheel. Steering isn't by hand but by shoulder, since there aren't handlebars. Instead, there are shields that fit each arm like sleeves and have the ability to rotate around the bike's frame. The two foot pegs are set 3 1/2 feet apart on either side of the tank, which the rider lies on, belly down.
That tank also moves up and down — you know, in case Batman needs to dodge bullets or slide under semis.
And you know he will.
Lucius Fox, gadget guru for Wayne Enterprises' Applied Sciences division (played by Morgan Freeman), is the guy who came up with the idea. At least he is in the movie.
The real man behind the machine is Nathan Crowley, creator of the Batmobile for Warners Bros. 2005 hit, "Batman Begins."
"The way we make films is we build things for real. We try and not rely on visual effects," said Crowley, who, in the end, had the easier job in making the bike come to life.
It was Chris Corbould who had to build the thing.
"I thought there was no chance we'd actually achieve it," Corbould said. "[Director] Chris Nolan and Nathan went for the look of it rather than thinking about the mechanics. That was the biggest challenge: Get their vision, but make it work and perform."
Not just once but several times. There are actually six Batpods, in case one or several are crashed during filming, which is likely.
Corbould wouldn't say what sort of engine was used for the slick gray-and-silver Batpod, just that it's "high performance." Nor would he give its top speed, except to say it's "very fast."
And the cost?
"I can't tell you that," Courbould said, laughing. "I haven't even told the producers."
Word is that Anthony Michael Hall will be playing the Riddler. A tragic mistake if true. Not for bad casting, but for putting in too many bad guys.
they should pull a fast one on us and do it all in the style of the original Batman movie, but still using the costumes/gadgets, etc. then added villains would only help the movie.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 11, 2007, 12:43:32 AM
Word is that Anthony Michael Hall will be playing the Riddler. A tragic mistake if true. Not for bad casting, but for putting in too many bad guys.
It's possible he could only be playing Edward Nigma and only have a brief, introductory appearance. That would just be a set-up for a future Riddler villain, which I think is forgivable.
Maggie Gyllenhaal Wants To Banish Katie Holmes From Batman Memory
Source: Post Chronicle
Maggie Gyllenhaal wants to banish the memory of Katie Holmes from her role in the forthcoming Batman movie - and is confident she isn't just "some generic lady in a dress".
The Secretary star insists she was singled out for the role as Batman's lover Rachel Dawes in The Dark Knight - the latest installment in the Caped Crusader franchise - by director Chris Nolan, and believes she will bring a new angle to the superhero's love interest.
She says, "I'm not thinking of it as a role that anyone's played before. I'm not walking into Katie Holmes' performance. I'm thinking of it as an opportunity to play somebody who's alive and smart. Chris asked me to do this because he wanted me, not because he wants some generic lady in a dress."
And the actress admits she is looking forward to performing her own stunts in the film: "I'm really excited about it. I mean, it's not some silly action movie: Chris Nolan is directing, Christian Bale's starring. I'm really excited and curious about doing a couple of stunts in Batman."
Well for continuity purposes I hope she at least acts in a similar way because that would be pretty lame if her personality is completely different.
For the record, the best recasting ever is Jennifer Parker's character in Back to the Future. I didn't even realize she was re-casted until a couple of years ago. I don't know if that's due to being so young when the movies came out or because Elisabeth Shue is a great actress.
New Dark Knight Viral Site?
Source: SuperheroHype
Fans have pointed us to WhySoSerious.com, which appears to be yet another viral site for The Dark Knight. Remember IBelieveinHarveyDent.com and IBelieveinHarveyDentToo.com? At the new site, the Joker seems to be recruiting people for his gang. But what's very interesting is that the page includes coordinates in San Diego and that the clock is counting down to approximately when the Warner Bros. panel takes place at Comic-Con. Hmmm...
http://www.whysoserious.com/
I wish I could be at that fucking Comic Con... I'm definitely making plans to attend next year
is it wrong to be bored with this movie already?
TEASER: http://video.whysoserious.com/TDK_Teaser_HD_Medium_bV78g1K.mov
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv724%2Ftasteslikehappy%2Ftheknife.jpg&hash=b4c82067c4a97e0f5bc30d379e7ecfd6036a7598)
72.4MB = 1 hour 23 minutes download time = :yabbse-angry:
you use dialup, mac?
No. mod used the HD Best Quality link and everybody seems to be using it.
Here's an easy to dl 9 MB version:
http://video.whysoserious.com/TDK_Teaser_HD_Medium_bV78g1K.mov
that totally doesn't sound like ledger. maybe it isn't. good laugh. i'd really like to see how he moves. what i've seen of his face suggests.. umm.. not sure the right word.. drugged up in a calm way. but his voice suggests the opposite. kinda reminds me of jim carrey mixed with beetlejuice.
A darker beetlejuice for sure.
Quote from: Pubrick on July 27, 2007, 02:51:27 AM
is it wrong to be bored with this movie already?
YES. It's going to be awesome.
The Dark Knight Footage Screened!
IGN catches scenes from the upcoming sequel... here's what we saw!
For those who've been following IGN Comics' coverage of Wizard World Chicago 2007, here's a special movie-related treat: The cast and crew of The Dark Knight — the follow-up to 2005's Batman Begins — made a special convention appearance to take questions from the fans and screen a special "sizzle reel" cut exclusively for the event. In attendance were the film's director Christopher Nolan, writers David Goyer and Jonathan Nolan, and cast Christian Bale (Bruce Wayne/Batman), Gary Oldman (Lt. James Gordon) and Aaron Eckhart (Harvey Dent/Two-Face).
While coverage of the Q&A can be found on this page tomorrow, we thought we'd give you a quick peek at the footage that was shown. Of the sizzle reel, Nolan noted that the production is exactly 50 percent done with filming, so he patched together what shots he had to show the audience.
Much to the joy of those in attendance, the reel showed off a number of shots of Heath Ledger as The Joker. The Clown Prince of Crime was seen in a prison cell, dramatically speaking at the camera as if scheming some sort of diabolical plot. There were also several shots of Batman and The Joker fighting in what appeared to be an interrogation room — in fact, the Dark Knight can be seen using "bad cop" interrogation techniques, throwing The Joker across a table. There is a scene of The Joker dancing with Rachel Dawes (played by Maggie Gyllenhaal), reminiscent of the way Jack Nicholson's Joker danced with Vicki Vale (played by Kim Basinger) in 1989's Batman. Finally, there are a number of shots showing a war-torn Gotham City — a machine gun-toting Joker firing toward the camera.
While Eckhart has already gone on the record with word that Harvey Dent would be making the change into the dreaded Two-Face in this film, the footage served to confirm this. A shot of Dent from behind has someone coming up to the District Attorney saying, "I thought you were dead?" Dent's reply: "Half." Massive scarring can then be glimpse on the left side of his face. A dramatic shot of a quarter spinning on a table also served to "wow" the audience. In his non-scarred form, there is a shot of Dent first meeting Bruce Wayne. "Rachel's told me a lot about you," Dent says. To which Wayne replies, "I hope not."
Not to be outdone, there were several shots of Wayne and Batman. A number of quick bursts showed Wayne testing out new gear and working on equipment. A full shot of Batman running in his new suit was shown, as was a snippet of the Tumbler in action (no noticeable changes to the supped up Batmobile were evident) and Batman riding the Batpod — a high-tech motorcycle that is said to launch out of the Tumbler.
Last but not least, there was a shot of Lt. Gordon where he appeared to be gearing up some off-camera force (Batman? other police officers?) for war. After the footage was shown, Oldman noted that he had the honor of shooting a number of scenes with the Joker and that Ledger's performance was going to "knock your socks off."
A ton of new pics here (http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/news/great-new-hi-res-images-from-the-dark-knight.php)
admin-edited for working link
*READ AT OWN RISK --- POTENTIALLY HUGE SPOILER IN HEADLINE*
Scoop: Catwoman And Joker For Batman 3 *swipe to read the spoilery part*
Source: Cinema Blend
It may seem a little early to be worrying about a third Batman movie while the second one is still filming, but if Batman Begins has taught us anything about Christopher Nolan it's that he plans ahead. Batman Begins set the stage for The Dark Knight, with references to the appearance of the Joker in the next film. It's likely that Nolan will do the same thing with The Dark Knight in setting up a third Batman sequel, and we have a surprising bit of information on who may show up in it.
One of our most reliable, long time scoopers just sent us the following tidbit: "Word is that Heath Ledger could be coming back in the next sequel which will have Two Face as the main villain." In Batman Begins, the movie's main bad guy was dead by the time the film was over. Ledger plays the Joker in The Dark Knight and if this is true then it means that he may end up surviving to torment Batman again. Assuming Heath is any good as Mr. J, I like the idea of Joker sticking around in the background of future film, making life miserable for Bats. He is after all, his chief nemesis. It makes sense for him to keep haranguing Bats.
Even more exciting than the idea that we may get the Joker in more than one movie is the identity of another villain who may be in Batman 3. According to our source, "it could also include a certain female feline as well." Bear in mind that the script for Batman 3 hasn't been written yet, so it's all just talk at this stage. But if this really is something Nolan is kicking around for a future Batman project, then don't be surprised to see a few hints at the future arrival of Catwoman in The Dark Knight.
So Joker survives part II? I only read the first line, I'm trying to stay as spoiler free as possible.
Quote from: Stefen on September 05, 2007, 08:35:34 AM
I only read the first line, I'm trying to stay as spoiler free as possible.
good point.
i've fixed it. apologies to anyone else who read the headline which was originally not covered by the spoiler warning.
lucky for me i'm not really in love with this series.
Batman special effects man killed
A special effects technician working on the new Batman film was killed when a vehicle he was in crashed while on a stunt test run.
The accident happened off-set and there was no filming taking place, movie company Warner Bros Pictures said. The victim was on a camera truck which was following a stunt vehicle, believed to have been the Batmobile. An ambulance spokeswoman said he was pronounced dead at a test track in Longcross, near Chertsey, in Surrey. Warner Bros said in a statement: "There was a fatal accident at a special effects facility for Batman: The Dark Knight. "A technician on the film died when the truck he was in struck a tree following a test run. "Warner Bros Pictures and the entire cast and crew of The Dark Knight are deeply saddened by this tragedy, and their hearts and prayers go out to the family and loved ones of the deceased." The accident, just before 1450 BST on Monday, is being investigated by Surrey Police and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). The HSE confirmed two vehicles were on a "filming production exercise".
A spokesman said: "It appears one vehicle was undertaking some stunt driving and another 4x4 provided the camera platform.
"The second vehicle and a camera operator were involved in a collision with a tree."
Batman: The Dark Knight, starring Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Gary Oldman and Morgan Freeman, is due to be released in UK cinemas next summer.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/england/surrey/7012317.stm
BREAKING: 'Dark Knight' Update: New Joker Pic, New Website, New Game!
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogsmithmedia.com%2Fwww.cinematical.com%2Fmedia%2F2007%2F10%2Fbatman124.jpg&hash=66a0c06feec6e198289aa1060048b6eaeb7aae41)
New Joker photo has been uncovered on the WhySoSerious site (along with a taste of dialogue: "And tonight you're gonna break your one rule"), which leads to another site, Rory's Death Kiss ... and to what appears to be another game: http://www.rorysdeathkiss.com/
IMAX Featurette here. (http://www.imax.com/ImaxWeb/xtras/?dl=beo/screeningroom/btn1/dk/dk_prologue)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinematical.com%2Fmedia%2F2007%2F11%2Fjokerempire2.jpg&hash=e62590eaeeb4bd1318df27cf48e3dac1b0834720)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinematical.com%2Fmedia%2F2007%2F11%2Fjoker113007.jpg&hash=7213bc6bf3393fb9fec8a210748caaa010cfef72)
The Today Show visits the set:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFSIq2Tgp-8
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aintitcool.com%2Fimages2007%2FBatman%26amp%3BJoker.jpg&hash=054b0b10c859817bf37b26673506706f6dda08c4)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aintitcool.com%2Fimages2007%2FTwoJokersClose.jpg&hash=62f618b9cba5360f8d59b2d437a30d098b70e4d8)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aintitcool.com%2Fimages2007%2FTwoJokersFull.jpg&hash=3b5acbfbee5d02808c70604f64ee33095eed3296)
time to nitpick: batman has TOO MUCH SHIT on his suit. they should've streamlined it to be less tech-y looking, not the other way around. and the mask looks even more oddly shaped this time.
Maybe it's just the white backdrop, but... these costumes are awfully looking like the works of Joel Schumacher. Disappointing.
Yeah, what the fuck are they doing posing? It's makes it look so comic bookie. The best thing about Begins was how it wasn't comic bookie.
they look like halloween costume ads.
Watchmen wins.
Quote from: overmeunderyou on December 02, 2007, 06:43:13 PM
these costumes are awfully looking like the works of Joel Schumacher.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi152.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fs162%2Fleadtester%2Fbatrob1.jpg&hash=1f9954517568bd37bb66f82b4625bd2b36b8aebb)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fecx.images-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FI%2F41hw0NFlhFL._AA280_.jpg&hash=cf8843e2e83d21adbff656cf30a5f1364d4f4438)
it's nothing new, but i think it looks silly because we're not used to see batman characters with a white background. i believe in chris nolan.
Well, the new suit is better than the one in Batman Begins (which looked too clunky and plain) and it is better than the mid 90s ones because the stylization to this suit is more military instead of chic. My major problem is that the mask is badly shaped compared to the rest of the costume. I'm not too worried because I could see the suit looking a lot better in the film. But I don't think I'll prefer any suit over the one in Burton's original.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on December 02, 2007, 09:39:20 PM
Well, the new suit is better than the one in Batman Begins (which looked too clunky and plain)
If by plain you mean simplistically brilliant. I don't know, I guess he looks more "Spawn" to me now with all the unnecessary detail. The mask's awkward definition would easily disappear under low light, but the different tones, layers and bulges on the actual suit... not so easily. It doesn't bother anyone else about the contrasting tones between the cape, suit, and helmet?
Maybe you just need a reminder of the beauty that once was in Batman Begins:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overmeunderyou.com%2Fmisc%2Fxixax%2Fbatman2.jpg&hash=1d573e971e85746d60badcb797ec1f3f365d99c0)
= Minimal, dark, & realistic.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overmeunderyou.com%2Fmisc%2Fxixax%2Fbatman.jpg&hash=a04cad58cb3153ace5bc5cc13d02fe4c94786caf)
= ...Nolan lost it?
No, not even the red x is convincing. In the Today Show interview, Bale said the suit was more modified to his body in this new one. You can tell because it looks smaller. The Batman Begins suit was just too big and too plain. It looked like Bale was playing a robotic version of Batman.
Also, sure different color tones, but in most dark scenes the look will be lost and everything will look dark.
Well, I hope it's less light than this (http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/batmansnewsuithighres.jpg) scene.
That looks fine to me. Besides the belt, the colors seem to mesh well into something coherent.
I'm actually totally with GT on this one. The costume in Begins was a big blocky mess, and despite the fact that Chris Nolan and I still completely disagree on ear placement, this one is a lot better. As long as Christian Bale can actually move in it, and not look like he's being shuttled around on a wire like the little kid in Pet Sematary, it's an improvement.
i couldn't care less about the costume, i don't understand the amount of importance placed on it. it's not pivotal to the story is it? i must be missing something. anyway, the reason it looks like that is cos they've based it on bale's emaciated body.
i also can't take any of those pictures seriously, they are LAUGHABLE. especially the one with the fist in the air, what the hell is that? at least chris o'donnell (who??) had a matching expression on his has-been face to match the ridiculous gesture. Bale looks like he's in a crowded train.
The Dark Knight of Public Transport
Quote from: Pubrick on December 02, 2007, 11:22:56 PM
i couldn't care less about the costume, i don't understand the amount of importance placed on it. it's not pivotal to the story is it? i must be missing something. anyway, the reason it looks like that is cos they've based it on bale's emaciated body.
I think more than any other super hero, Batman is based on his look. His presence is the reflection of darkness and mystique. He's meant to represent the idea of fear for criminals everywhere. No other super hero really banks on that subject. It's usually a focus on super powers. Since Batman has none, he gets a better personifcation (imo).
That's why whether the suit looks goofy or not is actually important.
Quote from: Pubrick on December 02, 2007, 11:22:56 PM
i also can't take any of those pictures seriously, they are LAUGHABLE. especially the one with the fist in the air, what the hell is that? at least chris o'donnell (who??) had a matching expression on his has-been face to match the ridiculous gesture. Bale looks like he's in a crowded train.
Well, they are fan pictures meant for 15 year old boys. They are what they are.
Quote from: Pubrick on December 02, 2007, 11:22:56 PM
i also can't take any of those pictures seriously, they are LAUGHABLE. especially the one with the fist in the air, what the hell is that? at least chris o'donnell (who??) had a matching expression on his has-been face to match the ridiculous gesture. Bale looks like he's in a crowded train.
Ohhhh thanks for that. That was the funniest thing I've read in a while.
'Dark Knight' Opening Scenes Reveal 'Radical' New Joker
Director Christopher Nolan talked to MTV News about 'adventurous' character as he helped unveil extended trailer Monday night.
Source: MTV
NEW YORK — If the opening frames of "The Dark Knight" are any indication, Batman will have his hands full come June. The Joker is on the loose, and MTV News has seen just how devilishly maniacal and dangerous he can be.
On Sunday night, a small crowd in New York gathered to watch the first six minutes of director Christopher Nolan's eagerly awaited sequel to "Batman Begins" and, holy extended trailer, the footage did not disappoint. Introduced by the beaming director and displayed on an 80-foot-tall IMAX screen, the opening of the film welcomed Heath Ledger's Joker to the Nolan/Batman universe.
And it was clear from the start, much as you might have loved Jack Nicholson's villain, the purple-clad bad man won't have the time or inclination to dance to Prince this time around. Nolan spoke at length with MTV News immediately prior to and following the special event, clearly proud of his new villain. "I think what Heath is doing is very adventurous," he said. "What he's doing is very radical. It's very much what I wanted. I knew I needed someone really fearless."
The opening sequence — specially filmed in the IMAX format, and set to debut December 14 with prints of "I Am Legend" in theaters — fulfilled a dream for Nolan, who said he had been wanting to shoot in the format for 15 years. "In the finished film, there will be four or five IMAX sequences," Nolan explained. He continued excitedly before the screening: "Everything about doing this in the IMAX format is trying to get that feeling back when I was a little kid when I'd sit in a movie theater and see images that were larger than life. That's what I'm trying to get back to with this material. I felt like introducing the Joker in this way because he's such a huge character [and it] would be a very fun thing to do."
But Nolan also revealed that not all the IMAX scenes will be action-filled. "Some of them are actually quiet scenes which pictorially we thought would be interesting. It's not all the slam-bam scenes," he said.
**BEGIN SPOILERS**
As the lights dimmed, the first images were revealed, of a gleaming and bright Gotham City. The camera moves in close on a building when suddenly the calm is shattered, quite literally, by a broken window. A group of clown-mask-clad robbers are about to seize a bank. They bicker about the mysterious man who has employed them. "Why do they call him the Joker?" one asks another. It's a refrain almost identical to those rooftop thugs who wonder about the mysterious "bat" in the opening frames of Tim Burton's "Batman."
Soon we are inside the bank as a tense standoff is under way. None of the employees resist, save one played by character-actor extraordinaire William Fichtner. This is a mob bank, we learn, and the wrong place to mess with, even for a group of seasoned criminals.
The controlled heist degenerates into a mess quickly enough, with each of the robbers mysteriously getting taken out. But it's not Batman knocking them off — rather, it's one of the robbers themselves. Just as the final two robbers are set to leave, one pulls a gun on the other. "I bet the Joker told you to kill me as soon as we loaded the cash," he says, clearly with the upper hand.
The eerily calm but playful response comes. "No, no, no. He killed the bus driver."
Before the gun-toting clown can finish asking, "What bus driver?," he is taken out by a school bus crashing into the bank. "School's out. Time to go!" screams the sole survivor of the gang.
All that remains for him is the bank employee (Fichtner) lying at his feet. By now we're pretty sure these are going to be his last words: "The criminals in this town used to believe in things. Honor. Respect. What do you believe in?" He screams it again, louder, "What do you believe in?"
And the mask comes off. The grinning, scarred face of the Joker is revealed at last. His face filled the 8-story-high screen as the clip played. "I believe whatever doesn't kill you simply makes you ...," he said. He pauses on the last word: " ... stranger."
As the Joker made his getaway, the sequence ended, but before the lights returned, the audience was treated to quick tantalizing flashes of the rest of the film. The Joker firing what looks to be an automatic weapon in a city street. Police Commissioner Gordon raising an ax dramatically. Batman whizzing by in his batpod. And finally, Gordon lowering the ax, destroying what we see now was the bat signal. Troubled times clearly await in Gotham. And it's clear who's to blame.
**END SPOILERS**
Nolan explained to MTV News that the Joker we meet in "The Dark Knight" is fully formed. Don't look for an origin story here. "To me, the Joker is an absolute," he said. "There are no shades of gray to him — maybe shades of purple. He's unbelievably dark. He bursts in just as he did in the comics."
Though there was no sign of much of the supporting cast in this extended preview, Nolan stressed there's much more to the story. Asked about Aaron Eckhart's Harvey "Two-Face" Dent, the director said "his story is in some ways the backbone of the film. [Bruce Wayne and Harvey] have an interesting relationship. They're friends and rivals."
And what about the caped crusader we left at the end of "Batman Begins"? Nolan explained that "he's a little more sure of himself" in the new film. "We didn't want him sitting around wrestling with the same angst. It's all-new angst," he laughed.
Nolan, who wrapped filming just two weeks ago, said he's shooting for a running time comparable to the first film's 140 minutes. Congratulated on the ambitious slam-bang start to his sequel, MTV News asked if the next six minutes could help but live up to the first. The director smiled and sighed nearly in unison. "That's what I'm working on now."
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whysoserious.com%2Fsteprightup%2Fimgs%2Fpostersmall.jpg&hash=9d73e8af5605d8ddc40e02b493482d608202e619)
NICE.
Yes, I agree. That is fucking coool.
best teaser poster 07
perfect for hanging.
and if that weren't cool enough, check this out.
The Dark Knight's Viral Marketing Gets Very Real - Cakes, Cell Phones and All!
December 5, 2007
Source: HollywoodChicago.com
by Alex Billington
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.firstshowing.net%2Fimg%2Ftdk-cakeviral-tsr.jpg&hash=cd3deb4776e7aa91fd716a6d5f30bd19f380e3ee)
On December 3rd a new page appeared at whysoserious.com/steprightup with a hammer game and some teddy bear toys. Each toy had an address on it located in a number of cities around the US. The note on the game told people to go to that address and say their name was "Robin Banks" (get it, "Robbing Banks") and they'd get something there. It was first come, first serve, and each location was a bakery. What they were given was a cake with a phone number written on it. Now here's the best part: inside the cake was an evidence bag (complete with Gotham City Police printing) that contained a cell phone, a charger, a Joker playing card and a note with instructions.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.firstshowing.net%2Fimg%2Ftdk-cakeviral-01.jpg&hash=35f2d34c38d419071f3dad2dedb95bd037ead059)
The note read the following:
"Wow. You really took the cake! Now put the icing on it. Call [number] immediately from this phone and this phone only. Do not give this phone number to anyone else.
Let's hope your fellow goons come through as well as you. Once all the layers are in place, you'll all get your just desserts. I'm a man of my word."
When the person called the number, a lady answered from Rent-a-Clown to thank the caller. Apparently she said she knew who the caller was and then after hanging up, they received a text message. It read:
"Good work, clown! Keep this phone charged and with you at all times. Don't call me. I will call you ... eventually."
If you can believe it, the Joker now has real, live people recruited to his army sitting with a phone awaiting his call. I thought this stuff only happened IN movies, not FOR movies!
http://www.firstshowing.net/2007/12/05/the-dark-knights-viral-marketing-gets-very-real-cakes-cell-phones-and-all/ (http://www.firstshowing.net/2007/12/05/the-dark-knights-viral-marketing-gets-very-real-cakes-cell-phones-and-all/)
so yeah this definitely gets my vote for best movie marketing ploy of the year. hell, decade.
Yeah, it's definetely interesting and alot of fun. But I can't help feeling that this movie is just getting cheezier and cheezier. It really feels like Joel Schumaker level here. The best thing about Begins was how serious and dark it was. There were no cakes or white background publicity shots.
I'm hoping this is more to do with the Joker being in it and him being sinister and playful, but I don't know. Begins was my 2nd favorite (not best) movie of 05 (after E. III) but I can't help but feel a doom and gloom feeling about this flick.
Come on Nolan! Prove me wrong!!!
i think he will. firstly i think the publicity shots are not indicative of the tone of the film, just like this wasn't.
Quote from: cron on December 02, 2007, 09:30:03 PM
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fecx.images-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FI%2F41hw0NFlhFL._AA280_.jpg&hash=cf8843e2e83d21adbff656cf30a5f1364d4f4438)
neither are the insane(ly awesome) stunts they're pulling which i think will go down as one of the best and most intricate fan involved viral marketing things ever.
also batman returns was dark as hell and they still had mcdonalds tie-in's. i think this will definitely be dark as shit (esp judging from the first joker shot released) and they're just trying to sell it a little lighter to the skittish public. i think the opening scene will def help give a better idea though. can't wait.
Quote from: modage on December 05, 2007, 05:21:05 PM
will go down as one of the best and most intricate fan involved viral marketing things ever.
..in the history of the marketing department.
future historians, once they finish printing out ono's entire post history and placing it in their museums right next to the declaration of independence, will look at this old art called "cinema" purely through the legendary golden age of marketing.
"great tales are told of cakes and white backgrounds. numbers to call.. "
"yes, but what about the movie?"
"oh, i havn't seen the movie."
haha i work in this shit. i have to give them props. :yabbse-grin:
Quote from: Pubrick on December 05, 2007, 05:35:15 PM
"great tales are told of cakes and white backgrounds. numbers to call.. "
"yes, but what about the movie?"
"oh, i havn't seen the movie."
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gTghUoScGO8 (http://youtube.com/watch?v=gTghUoScGO8)
IGN Interviews Christopher Nolan
Our exclusive chat with the director about The Dark Knight, the JLA movie and Bale in T4!
IGN Movies attended a special screening and reception Wednesday for the IMAX prologue of The Dark Knight, which is set to debut with the Dec. 14th release of Warner Bros.' I Am Legend in IMAX. Christopher Nolan was on hand to introduce the thrilling sequence, which is the opening six minutes of the film that introduces the Joker during a Gotham City bank robbery. (Look for our full report on the screened IMAX footage sometime Thursday.)
IGN was able to chat exclusively with Chris Nolan during a cocktail reception following the screening and here's what he had to say about The Dark Knight and more:
IGN: How many IMAX sequences will be included in The Dark Knight in addition to the Joker's introduction?
Christopher Nolan: I think there will be four or five in the finished film. I've only just started editing the feature so it is as yet uncertain. As we shot we intended to shoot four, but we enjoyed it so much and we were loving the results so much as we were watching dailies. We were sitting there on the stage in Chicago watching dailies on an eight-story screen. It's a pretty incredible thing. So we started throwing the cameras [in] a little bit more and more, so it will be a little more in the film than that but primarily they're the big action beats.
IGN: What was your criteria for selecting the scenes to be shot in IMAX?
Nolan: Well, I started with the big action beats but we actually started shooting some of the quieter moments as well [in IMAX]. Yeah, the pictorially interesting, quieter, montage kind of moments. We thought we'd try that. It's just a beautiful way -- it's just the best, most extraordinary image there is in motion pictures so it's kind of addictive. You start wanting to use it more and more.
IGN: Was Harvey Dent's transformation into Two-Face shot in IMAX?
Nolan: Gosh, I'm trying to remember ... We mixed in -- that depends on how you look at it. It's a hard one to answer, actually.
IGN: What about the much talked about shot from Wizard World Chicago of seeing Dent/Two-Face from behind at the bar?
Nolan: No, that's all 35[mm] actually.
IGN: The Joker in this film seems to draw the most from Batman #1, where he was described as "a grim jester." Why, of all the many incarnations of the Joker through the years, did you come to select that one as opposed to, say, The Killing Joke, which is one the fans always clamor about?
Nolan: Well, you know to be honest, we looked at all of them. We didn't look at those first stories until after we'd come up with our story and Jonah started working on the job. It's a weird thing. He called me up halfway through his job and said, "By the way, have you looked at his first and second appearance recently?" And I think maybe years ago I'd seen them. I think David Goyer had told me about them. Went back and looked at them and we wound up at a place that's drawn very directly from that stuff. But we arrived at it in our own way by researching a lot of the more recent Joker stuff, and thinking about what this icon is when viewed through the prism of Batman Begins. When viewed in the world we created, in the tone we created. And what we arrived at is somebody who is quite a serious guy, really, considering his name's the Joker and that turned out to be quite similar to his original conception.
IGN: Judging from all the stills we've seen thus far, he hardly ever smiles. Do you think others have misinterpreted the character and thought he was supposed to be funny when he may actually be meant to be more ironic?
Nolan: There are different types of being funny. The sequence you've seen has a very dark sense of humor to it, I think. Very sardonic sense of humor to what he's doing and that's the way in which he's funny. And, yes, it's very easy to confuse that with a lot of smiling and a lot of laughing but what he does in the film is very difficult to capture in stills to be perfectly frank. It's one of the reasons we wanted to show this sequence as well, to get his introduction out there. It's the total package. It's the way he moves, the way he is, it's the way he inhabits the character. I'm just so excited by it. I think people will be really blown away by it.
IGN: How would you describe Joker's walk? It's not quite a limp. It's the first thing I noticed about the character. There's just something ... off.
Nolan: There's just a feel to it and you can't put your finger on it, and that's what I love about it. It's very original and very unique. It's a unique combination of elements. He would just blow me away every day on set. It was an incredible thing to watch.
IGN: In all the many fan casting wish lists that made the rounds online, Ledger's name never came up. How and when did you think to cast him?
Nolan: To be honest, I don't exactly remember when it came to pass. I'd met with Heath several times on projects in the past and nothing had ever come of it. And I think he'd heard I was looking for someone to play the Joker before we had a script, and I'd heard that he was really actually into the idea. And we met and we got each other. We both had exactly the same concept in our heads of who that guy would be in this film in the way that we'd interpreted it. It wasn't specific to, "Oh, he's going to look like this or talk like that" at all. It was about a psychological concept. It was about a character concept. It was about the threat of anarchy. It was about anarchy being the most frightening thing there is. Chaos and anarchy in this day and age, and I think it is. It's certainly the thing I'm most afraid of.
IGN: And what about the decision to have Joker wear make-up rather than be altered by chemicals. Was it just easier from a storytelling perspective to have him wear make-up than to explain how chemicals changed him?
Nolan: Well, we never wanted to do an origin story for the Joker in this film. The arc of the story is much more Harvey Dent's; the Joker is presented as an absolute. It's a very thrilling element in the film, and a very important element, but we wanted to deal with the rise of the Joker not the origin of the Joker, if that makes sense.
IGN: In addition to Ledger, there are a lot of other actors in the cast, such as Eric Roberts and Anthony Michael Hall, whom people might not have thought to cast.
Nolan: Well, we have a terrific casting director, John Papsidera, who just comes up with great ideas. He introduced me to fantastic people. And then you think about an actor like Eric Roberts, who is just incredibly talented. So if you can convince someone like that to join your film, you're filling out the world of the film with incredibly talented people who can support the main actors and that gives everything depth and breadth. A great actor like Eric or any of these guys can just take a scene and take a character and find something in him, in a moment and give you more depth in a moment than you'd otherwise have.
IGN: And Anthony Michael Hall is playing a reporter?
Nolan: Yeah, he is. Yeah.
IGN: Was there ever any concern about including a reporter character in the film since the 1989 Batman film had Alexander Knox in it?
Nolan: Well, there's an always an element -- there's plenty of other films, whether it's Daredevil or something, where reporters come into it and there's a reason for it. The reason being, particularly in the case of The Dark Knight, we're attempting to tell a very large, city story or the story of a city. In the same way that, I don't know, Michael Mann's films, like Heat or something. That was sort of an inspiration. If you want to take on Gotham, you want to give Gotham a kind of weight and breadth and depth in there. So you wend up dealing with the political figures, the media figures. That's part of the whole fabric of how a city is bound together.
IGN: So is that where you got the idea to cast William Fichtner as the bank manager in your robbery sequence? From Heat?
Nolan: (laughs) Yeah, I know! Exactly! It's a bit of a nod to that. He's just an incredible talent and I wanted somebody who'd jump off the screen in our first six minutes because he's really the only face you see for most of it.
IGN: So Christian Bale's casting in the next Terminator has now been confirmed. Does that mean he's no longer involved with the Batman franchise and will be doing that instead?
Nolan: (laughs) That would be news to him. No, it's great. He's an incredible actor and will bring something great to that production. They're very lucky to have him, but he's not afraid to take risks and take on all kinds of different projects. That's one of the reasons why I like working with him.
IGN: Are you concerned at all about the Justice League of America movie and of a new Batman being introduced to audiences while your franchise is still going?
Nolan: Not really. To be perfectly honest, it's not really something I've thought about much. I really am just immersed in making this movie. Whatever will happen will happen, and we're just working very hard to make this movie the best it can be.
IGN: So it's expected that the third film will focus more on Two-Face. Will it be a solo story for him or will there be another, secondary villain included in it?
Nolan: I wouldn't want to give away too much about this film, but the thing I will say, and I said it a lot about Batman Begins and it was genuinely the truth, is I don't think in terms of sequels. I think in terms of making this film the best film it can be and the most complete film it can be.
The Ha Ha Times (http://www.thehahahatimes.com/)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg468.imageshack.us%2Fimg468%2F5577%2Fscan0001ee0if1.th.jpg&hash=b642131adc79e3671ab07bd8051141a06caa2a45) (http://img468.imageshack.us/my.php?image=scan0001ee0if1.jpg)
IInternational Poster:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg83.imageshack.us%2Fimg83%2F893%2Fposterexclusivoomeletevu0.th.jpg&hash=64b49ca117000dddd82f6219c5f25efe881a9601) (http://img83.imageshack.us/my.php?image=posterexclusivoomeletevu0.jpg)
I wonder if the graphic designers know Batman is staring straight into a pole?
Looks like Batman is presiding over Project Mayhem.
Yeah... looks like...
Also looks like someone had Photoshop and a bunch of stock pictures of buildings that were all in different perspective (also different resolutions and levels of focus) and threw them all together into an unholy mess of a city that would not and could not exist in real life. And then put Batman in front of it, staring at a pole.
And got paid thousands of dollars to do it. Fuck you, world!
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.judao.com.br%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2007%2F12%2Fthe_dark_knight_outro_poster.jpg&hash=275392676465f6e8d9f25ffde85ac0fae17e3225)
Quote from: B.C. Long on December 13, 2007, 09:17:06 PM
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg83.imageshack.us%2Fimg83%2F893%2Fposterexclusivoomeletevu0.th.jpg&hash=64b49ca117000dddd82f6219c5f25efe881a9601) (http://img83.imageshack.us/my.php?image=posterexclusivoomeletevu0.jpg)
Isn't the bat cave kinda high up?
And you'd think they'd show us the Joker's face on the poster since we've all seen it already!
New Trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwT8GyLxIhk&eurl=http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35061) hurry up since it probably won't be there long. This is one damn amazing trailer that I can't wait to see in a theater.
Quote from: edison on December 14, 2007, 08:17:18 AM
New Trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwT8GyLxIhk&eurl=http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35061)
that just redeemed my faith in trailers to make me believe in something i wasn't all that interested in.
this could be something special for one reason alone..
ledger steals the trailer and he'll steal the movie, that's for sure.
Quote from: Sleepless on December 14, 2007, 08:13:06 AM
And you'd think they'd show us the Joker's face on the poster since we've all seen it already!
i blame bill condon (http://xixax.com/index.php?topic=8427.msg234501#msg234501)..
Quote from: edison on December 14, 2007, 08:17:18 AM
New Trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwT8GyLxIhk&eurl=http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35061) hurry up since it probably won't be there long. This is one damn amazing trailer that I can't wait to see in a theater.
This is a private video. If you have been sent this video, please make sure you accept the sender's friend request.
HELP!!!
Here's one that's piss poor quality. Is this what the other one looked like?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSKHQEwaM_A
Quote from: H.(sparro)W. on December 14, 2007, 09:36:40 AM
Here's one that's piss poor quality. Is this what the other one looked like?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSKHQEwaM_A
Yup
Wow, the new posters and trailer make the movie look ultra high-tech. Kinda like Equilibrium.
damn, i'm like an hour too late.
whatever, i'd just as soon wait for quicktime hd.
If the whole movie is as incredible as the IMAX clip, Christopher Nolan might just have made one of the most entertaining films of all time. Hey mod, am I allowed to put this in my top ten of the year?
Watch This Space:
http://atasteforthetheatrical.com/
Quote from: MacGuffin on December 16, 2007, 12:13:24 AM
Watch This Space:
http://atasteforthetheatrical.com/
It's up
that is a great trailer. i want to give ledger a pass, this movie looks awesome.
six minute prologue (crappy quality)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IB8_Jd9jMf0
holy Heath Ledger, Batman!
Wow, Heath Ledger looks (and sounds) awesome!
Is there anywhere else that 6 minute prologue is on the net?
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmoviesmedia.ign.com%2Fmovies%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F842%2F842090%2Fthe-dark-knight-20071218061913517.jpg&hash=ec5321d4c0e51ce7c3daac18fb7eb2ed988d913e)
this is the best i can offer for those who haven't seen the clip just yet, and despite the odd angles and disembodied head for the first half (not to mention the shite quality overall) this has made me incredibly excited where i wasn't before (in my pants):
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/147007.html?playlist=featured
Quote from: The Perineum Falcon on December 18, 2007, 03:57:00 PM
this is the best i can offer for those who haven't seen the clip just yet, and despite the odd angles and disembodied head for the first half (not to mention the shite quality overall) this has made me incredibly excited where i wasn't before (in my pants):
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/147007.html?playlist=featured
You my friend are awesome! May you have more height than Schwartzman and better friends than Dave Grohl for the rest of your life!
New Old Trailer here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHufrsP9XMA)?
Quote from: MacGuffin on January 02, 2008, 06:46:03 PM
New Old Trailer here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHufrsP9XMA)?
New Less Old Trailer here? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zox_x636TqE)
is mac just straight up invisible to some ppl?
i apologize
They're in good company on the side of evil
Heath Ledger and Aaron Eckhart join a line of high-profile actors who battle Batman.
By Geoff Boucher, Los Angeles Times
HEATH LEDGER and Aaron Eckhart, welcome to Hollywood's elite and gaudy Arkham club.
In the highly anticipated new Batman film "The Dark Knight," which opens July 18, Ledger is stepping into the purple suit of the Joker, while Eckhart will portray Gotham City Dist. Atty. Harvey Dent, who starts the movie as a handsome lawman but ends up as Two-Face, the villain driven insane by disfiguring wounds.
"Harvey Dent is a tragic figure, and his story is the backbone of this film," says Christopher Nolan, the director of the acclaimed franchise-rejuvenating 2005 film "Batman Begins," who returns with Christian Bale again playing the caped crusader. "The Joker, he sort of cuts through the film -- he's got no story arc, he's just a force of nature tearing through. Heath has given an amazing performance in the role, it's really extraordinary."
Ledger and Eckhart will be joined in "Dark Knight" by "Batman" veteran Cillian Murphy, who reprises his role as the Scarecrow.
There's a long and colorful screen history of Gotham bad guys who all seem to die violently or end up imprisoned (if only briefly) in the bleak towers of Arkham Asylum. The scenery-chewing roles -- as well as some staggering paydays -- have attracted a gallery of Hollywood's biggest names, including four Oscar winners (Jack Nicholson, Tommy Lee Jones, Jack Palance, Christopher Walken) and half a dozen Oscar nominees (Michelle Pfeiffer, Liam Neeson, Jim Carrey, Uma Thurman, Ken Watanabe, Danny DeVito) and, um, one frosty-looking governor (Arnold Schwarzenegger).
Don't expect a lot laughs in this summer's return to the cave. "It's a dark and complex story," Nolan said, "and the villains are dark and complex as well."
Jim Carrey was oscar-nommed? imdb says no.
Quote from: picolas on January 15, 2008, 04:16:31 PM
Jim Carrey was oscar-nommed? imdb says no.
He wasn't. Just sloppy journalism.
Quote from: ddiggler on December 17, 2007, 09:35:40 AM
six minute prologue (crappy quality)
I just saw that before I am Legend, and wow it looked awesome in the imax theater, everyone wanted to see that instead of Legend.
It's safe to say Heath Ledger will be the best Joker ever.
Man, with Heath Ledger dying, this movie just lost alot of it's luster for me. Too sad.
There's no fucking way I could go see the movie now and consider him a bad guy in any way. Like project negative feelings we reserve for bad guys. It'd have to be down the road I could accept it because right now I'm semi-defensive at the thought.
SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The worst part is that The Joker was coming back for the 3rd movie. Now they'll either to reshoot somehow or recast The Joker for the last part of the trilogy, which sucks.
according to AICN...
There's a lot of rumors swirling around right now in regards to Heath and where his involvement with THE DARK KNIGHT was. I got it confirmed from a source involved in Post-Production on THE DARK KNIGHT. Heath's post work was complete. He had indeed finished it, as to not interfere with the production of the film he was doing with Gilliam. We're now working to find out what's going to happen there. The last known photo of Heath was as a clown in that film. Will Terry re-cast? What will happen? We'll try to find out for all of you. But there will be no-dubbing on Heath in THE DARK KNIGHT - his performance was finished.
Not to seem crass, but I'm calling the posthumous Best Supporting Actor award right here and now.
i bet they'll edit the movie to make Batman look like the bad guy now.
Quote from: modage on January 02, 2008, 07:38:15 PM
Quote from: MacGuffin on January 02, 2008, 06:46:03 PM
New Old Trailer here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHufrsP9XMA)?
New Less Old Trailer here? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zox_x636TqE)
Lego Style (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StWZDqqBfJo&eurl)
Quote from: edison on February 06, 2008, 04:43:47 PM
Quote from: modage on January 02, 2008, 07:38:15 PM
Quote from: MacGuffin on January 02, 2008, 06:46:03 PM
New Old Trailer here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHufrsP9XMA)?
New Less Old Trailer here? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zox_x636TqE)
Lego Style (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StWZDqqBfJo&eurl)
Damn, some people really have nothing to do. Like me, except I can't do something like this.
Batman's Burden: A Director Confronts Darkness and Death
By DAVID M. HALBFINGER; New York Times
A DREARY office plaza at Wabash Street and the river, late afternoon. A mist blows in from Lake Michigan. Producers and idle actors huddle under a flimsy canopy; grips hastily unfold another over their high-priced gear. A few stories overhead, a stunt double in a familiar black-caped costume swings from a hoist, slamming into a window in a Mies van der Rohe tower that we shall imagine is Gotham City Hall. A noose is around his neck, a knife plunged into his heart.
The meaning is clear: Batman, or at least his döppelganger, is dead.
Christopher Nolan, the director of "The Dark Knight" — the follow-up to his 2005 franchise reboot, "Batman Begins" — is unperturbed by the rain, but a tiny detail irks him. "Hey, buster!" he shouts to the stuntman, craning his neck skyward and raising his voice for the first time all day (politely, as ever, but enough so he can be heard). "Could you turn yourself a little more to the left?"
In so many ways this isn't what you'd expect of a $180 million Hollywood comic-book movie sequel with a zillion moving parts, a cast of thousands and sets from here to Hong Kong. Anyone else would shoot indoors, use digital effects or wait for clear skies; Mr. Nolan rolls with the weather's punches, believing that the messiness of reality can't be faked. Another filmmaker would leave a shot like this in the hands of a second-unit director, but Mr. Nolan doesn't use one; if it's on the screen, he directed it, and his longtime cinematographer, Wally Pfister, worked the camera. Stars on any other movie would have fled to their trailers to wait in comfort until needed again. Here, Gary Oldman is watching and shivering along with everybody else, cracking jokes to keep warm.
Yet Mr. Nolan, 37, has barely changed his approach to filmmaking since his 2000 indie-smash "Memento," the film noir in reverse starring Guy Pearce that Mr. Nolan's brother, Jonathan, dreamed up, and Christopher Nolan made for $5 million. "A movie is a movie," he says. So he's still scribbling new dialogue on the set, improvising camera moves as he goes, letting his actors decide when it's time to move on and otherwise racing through each day as if his money might run out. It's just that his jazz combo of a crew has mushroomed into a philharmonic — with whole new sections of prosthetics artists, special-effects wizards and so on. "But we're still all riffing off of him," Mr. Pfister says.
That kind of maestro is just what Warner Brothers wanted five years ago when it hired Mr. Nolan to restore a jewel of a property that had become a laughingstock with Joel Schumacher's 1997 reviled "Batman and Robin," best remembered for George Clooney's nipple suit.
But any risks inherent in giving over such a huge franchise, with so much history and potential, to an auteur untested at making blockbusters were outweighed by the need to re-establish credibility with Batman's alienated fan base. "If the people who make the film aren't taking it seriously," Mr. Nolan said, summarizing fans' view of the 1997 movie, "why should we?"
Now the question is whether Mr. Nolan's vision of Batman can not only maintain its hold on the imaginations of comic fans and critics, but expand its reach to a wider summer moviegoing audience, even as the death of Heath Ledger, who played the Joker in "The Dark Knight," has added unanticipated morbidity to the film's deliberate darkness.
But if Mr. Nolan was feeling any stress on the set in Chicago last year, his easygoing reserve concealed it. Dressed, as always, in his own somewhat formal uniform — dark blazer, waistcoat, French cuffs; a thermos of tea in hand; a wireless video monitor around his neck — he also seemed a bit of a throwback. While many filmmakers watch in seclusion on television screens, he stood next to the camera, always on his feet unless he was kneeling to whisper in someone's ear. "Acting is such a vulnerable thing, you don't want to be told in front of others that you've made a mistake, or 'Try this,' " said Aaron Eckhart, who plays Harvey Dent, a district attorney. "Chris understands that."
But then, it hasn't been so long since Mr. Nolan bootstrapped himself into the film business, cobbling together bits of 16-millimeter film stock with $6,000 to make his first feature, "Following" (1998), over a year's worth of weekends. "Memento," which came next, was a critical smash, and with Steven Soderbergh's endorsement, he landed his first studio assignment: directing Al Pacino and Hilary Swank in "Insomnia" (2002) on a $50 million budget.
That fall, after slaving over a screenplay about Howard Hughes only to have Martin Scorsese beat him to the punch, Mr. Nolan put together a passionate 45-minute pitch for rewinding the Batman saga to its beginning. Alan Horn, Warner's president, approved it on the spot. "Besides his excitement about the story he wanted to tell, he just brings a certain weight and credibility," said Jeff Robinov, the studio's No. 2 executive, who had first tried to interest Mr. Nolan in "Troy."
Three times the cost of "Insomnia" and far greater in scope, "Batman Begins" catapulted Mr. Nolan into the top tier of mainstream filmmakers. Critics mostly loved it, though some seemed to resent him for leaving the indie world behind. While not an overpowering blockbuster, with $205 million in domestic box office, it expanded the audience for Batman well beyond comic fans. And it gave Warner Brothers a superhero who could hold his head up next to Sony's Spider-Man and Fox's X-Men.
His Caped Crusader, Christian Bale (who also starred in Mr. Nolan's entr'acte between the Batman films, "The Prestige"), recalls how "people would kind of laugh" when they heard that he and Mr. Nolan were taking Batman seriously. But when they finally saw the film, the same people "would say, 'What a surprise,' " Mr. Bale said. "I believe that even the most popcornlike movie can be done incredibly well, and can have something that you really have to work at. That was what attracted me to doing it the first time, because I felt I'd never seen that done, and I didn't understand why."
It's enough to make a marketing executive cringe, that the word "dense" pops up in conversations with Mr. Nolan and his actors. But it's true: "The Dark Knight," which will be released on July 18, is jammed with characters, plot and action. It picks up where "Batman Begins" left off, with Mr. Oldman's police lieutenant, Jim Gordon, warning about the perils of escalation: that Batman's extreme measures could invite a like response from the criminal element. And sure enough, a deadly new villain, the Joker, emerges to wreak havoc.
In a political context this would politely be called an "unintended consequence." (Gotham as Baghdad, anyone?) Mr. Nolan doesn't deny the overtones. "As we looked through the comics, there was this fascinating idea that Batman's presence in Gotham actually attracts criminals to Gotham, attracts lunacy," he said. "When you're dealing with questionable notions like people taking the law into their own hands, you have to really ask, where does that lead? That's what makes the character so dark, because he expresses a vengeful desire."
In Mr. Bale's view "The Dark Knight" is an even lonelier outing for his character, who once naïvely thought his crime fighting could be a finite endeavor. "This escalation has now meant that he feels more of a duty to continue," he said. "And now you have not just a young man in pain attempting to find some kind of an answer, you have somebody who actually has power, who is burdened by that power, and is having to recognize the difference between attaining that power and holding on to it."
It may not be too much of a stretch to see another analogy here for Mr. Nolan: Rebooting the Batman franchise may be behind him, but he still has to improve upon it. Sequels are always trickier. And now he must also navigate the aftermath of the Jan. 22 death of Mr. Ledger.
It came well into editing, and only after the studio had introduced Mr. Ledger's Joker through posters, trailers and a six-minute Imax short. But it automatically raised the stakes: the acclaimed actor's final role would be ... a comic-book grotesque? Worse, though Mr. Ledger had finished work on "The Dark Knight" in October and was already halfway through another film, news that the prescription drugs that killed him included sleep aids — along with narcotics — prompted Internet chatter about whether his intense performance as the Joker, styled after Malcolm McDowell's in "A Clockwork Orange," had been a factor in his demise.
Mr. Ledger, however, also called it "the most fun I've ever had, or probably ever will have, playing a character." But his fatigue was obvious, said Michael Caine, who briefly overlapped with him. "He was exhausted, I mean he was really tired. I remember saying to him, 'I'm too old to have the bloody energy to play that part.' And I thought to myself, I didn't have the energy when I was his age."
Mr. Pfister, the cinematographer, said Mr. Ledger seemed "like he was busting blood vessels in his head," he was so intense. "It was like a séance, where the medium takes on another person and then is so completely drained."
Will Mr. Ledger's death cast a pall over "The Dark Knight," whose tragic plot turns already make it much darker than "Batman Begins"? "We'll see," said Mr. Robinov, of Warner Brothers. Mr. Nolan, for his part, said he felt a "massive sense of responsibility" to do right by Mr. Ledger's "terrifying, amazing" performance.
"It's stunning, it's iconic," he said. "It's going to just blow people away."
All the talk of darkness obscures what may come as an aesthetic surprise in "The Dark Knight": the creepy shadows and gothic Wayne Manor are gone, replaced by sleek towers, shiny surfaces, bright lighting and the vistas of a city with shoulders bigger than Batman's. "I've tried to unclutter the Gotham we created on the last film," said Nathan Crowley, Mr. Nolan's production designer. "Gotham is in chaos. We keep blowing up stuff. So we can keep our images clean," setting a solitary hero against the vastness of Chicago.
Mr. Nolan said he tried to make "Batman Begins" realistic by taking Wayne out of Gotham for portions of the story. For "The Dark Knight" he wanted Gotham to seem straight out of the news. "We just let everyone know up front: this is a location movie," he said.
Mr. Nolan does his planning in his own tricked-out lair: a converted garage behind his home near the Hollywood hills (and just down the street from the Batcave entrance in the campy 1960s television series). There he and his producer-wife, Emma Thomas — who gave birth to their fourth child last September — gathered with Mr. Crowley, Mr. Pfister, the costume designer Lindy Hemming and other department heads to brainstorm. It's where Mr. Crowley designed the tanklike Batmobile known as "the Tumbler," where Ms. Hemming came up with a uniform that finally let Mr. Bale turn his head at the neck and where she first pitched the idea of the Joker as Johnny Rotten.
If he barely uses storyboards, let alone the computer-animated "previsualization" wizardry common to effects-heavy films, Mr. Nolan is on the cutting edge with one technology. He used the unwieldy Imax cameras to shoot about 30 minutes of "The Dark Knight," including the entire opening.
"We've been trying to talk filmmakers into doing this for nearly 40 years," said David Keighley, an old Imax hand. And even after a Steadicam collapsed under the weight of an Imax camera, Mr. Nolan held firm. "If David Lean could carry a 65-millimeter camera through the desert," he said, "why shouldn't we be able to do this?"
"It scares people a bit," Mr. Nolan says of what could be called his planned-out impulsiveness. "We just go and shoot the stuff, and see what looks the best and what works. But on a big movie, you actually have more freedom. You can say, 'O.K., it's 3 in the morning — can we get the police to close down that street?' "
Ledger's Joker Makes Dramatic Entrance
This time out, there's no vat of chemicals to explain how Batman's greatest enemy came to be the twisted sociopath known as the Joker.
Heath Ledger's Joker springs full-blown in this summer's "The Dark Knight," the sequel to 2005's "Batman Begins" that was previewed for theater owners Thursday with a clip showing the new movie's opening sequence.
Unlike 1989's "Batman," in which the deranged, disfigured clown appearance of Jack Nicholson's Joker resulted from a dip in chemical goo, "The Dark Knight" starts right in with the bad guy in all his psychopathic glory.
"I believe whatever doesn't kill you simply makes you stranger," Ledger's depraved Joker cryptically tells an accomplice in the opening scenes, in which he pulls off a daring bank robbery.
In an interview at ShoWest, a theater-owners convention where distributor Warner Bros. showed off footage of "The Dark Knight" and the rest of its summer lineup, director Christopher Nolan said it was almost inevitable that the sequel would pit Christian Bale's Batman against the Joker.
"The psychopathic clown, that's an icon to stand with the guy with the ears and cape," Nolan said. "It's just a wonderful visual relationship, and it's a terrifying image."
Long before Ledger's death of an accidental prescription drug overdose in January, the marketing of the movie had focused on the villain's rise to power and his creepy appearance.
There had been speculation among critics and fans that the studio and filmmakers might take a different approach to selling the film in light of Ledger's death, but the marketing has gone on as originally planned.
"I think he'd be very pleased to see we're just moving ahead as is," Nolan said. "If you try to honor somebody, you honor them by respecting their work and putting it out there for as many people to see. He was immensely proud of the work he did on the film. I feel a great burden to present that in an undistorted form."
"The Dark Knight" is due in theaters July 18.
The last time producer Charles Roven saw Ledger was when he showed the actor the very footage that was screened at ShoWest.
Fans have been buzzing over the anarchic style Ledger brings to the role in the movie's trailer, but the actor himself was utterly taken by what he saw of himself on screen, Roven said.
"He was just blown away by his own performance," Roven said. "He said, `Can I see it again?' So he was really, really thrilled."
Bale reprising his role as the wealthy Bruce Wayne, who moonlights as the emotionally tormented crimefighter said he watched the footage Thursday with a heaviness of heart over Ledger. But Bale said he hopes the movie will serve as a testament.
"I hope that this can be seen as a celebration of his work," Bale said. "He did a phenomenal job. It was a real joy working with the man. It was a joy knowing him, as well. I liked him a great deal, and I liked also how seriously he took his work."
'Dark Knight' Stars, Director Want Film To 'Celebrate' Heath Ledger's Work
Christian Bale says Ledger's Joker will be 'incredibly memorable for years to come.'
Source: MTV
LAS VEGAS — With roughly four months to go, the talents behind "The Dark Knight" gathered recently to reveal a film that's become remarkably similar to its cowl-clad title character. As such, like Batman himself, Christian Bale, Maggie Gyllenhaal and director Christopher Nolan find themselves shifting gears between being secretive, superheroic and fighting back a deep sadness.
"It was tremendously emotional, right when he passed, having to go back in and look at him every day," Nolan revealed of his mind-set while editing the movie in the weeks following Heath Ledger's tragic death. "But the truth is, I feel very lucky to have something productive to do, to have a performance that he was very, very proud of, and that he had entrusted to me to finish."
Gyllenhaal said she expected to be emotional on her first viewing of a finished "Knight" print. "I'll feel a lot of things about it. ... I don't know how it will be."
"Heath has given an incredible performance, a real definition of the character that I think will be incredibly memorable for years to come," Bale said of Ledger's work as the Joker. "I want to do nothing but celebrate his work."
With that in mind, it was back to the business at hand: getting the stars to cough up tasty tidbits on what is arguably the most anticipated film of the year. (Read what Nolan had to say about Batman's new "gizmos and gadgets and things" here in the MTV Movies Blog.)
"There is a pretty amazing meeting of the minds between Batman and Joker in the middle of the film that we haven't wanted to show to people yet," Nolan revealed when asked about the "Dark Knight" moment he most enjoys watching in the edit bay. "We want to save that for the movie. ... It's very much an acting scene, but I would be lying if I said it was a purely verbal smackdown."
"I did a scene where I get to interrogate a bad guy as a lawyer, trying to break a witness, and I had a blast shooting that scene," explained Gyllenhaal, who takes over the Katie Holmes role of Rachel Dawes for the sequel. "I've always wanted to play a lawyer in a courtroom, and I got to do that a little bit here."
"We have progressed from an angry young man trying to come to terms with his own pain and starting on an endeavor which he believes to be finite [to] somebody who's attained that power, and is now having to recognize the responsibilities that come with it," Bale said of the subject matter that made him want to hop back into that hot leather suit. "We had no interest in making a second unless we believed that we could surpass and improve on the first. I've not seen ['Dark Knight'], but from working on the movie, the feeling was that absolutely we surpassed that."
The team also cleared up a few details on whether we'll ever see deposed mob boss Carmine Falcone in a Batman sequel ("No," Nolan said. "But Tom [Wilkinson] was superb to work with in 'Batman Begins' "); Anthony Michael Hall's mysterious role ("He plays a news anchorman in the movie," Bale revealed); and whether Gyllenhaal is the final Rachel in the series ("Yeah," she promised. "I would love to do another one").
When Gyllenhaal does return for a third flick, the 30-year-old actress hopes she'll have the same interesting dichotomy of lead actors. "I sort of have two leading men in the movie, both Aaron Eckhart and Christian. ... They're both fantastic and gorgeous and incredibly talented," she said of her character's schizophrenic love triangle with Bruce Wayne/Batman and Harvey Dent/Two-Face. "In both actors, and both characters they play, they embrace what's right and sexy and also really dark and troubled about both of the people they play."
"I would say the Bruce Wayne character is a lot closer to Harvey Dent than the Joker," Nolan reasoned. "[Dent] is very relatable to Batman, and he certainly makes that point himself in the movie. ... The Joker is an absolute. He is a force of evil and anarchy. He just cuts through the movie like the shark in 'Jaws' or something. This is not a guy with an arc, and it's not about his origin. This is just the rise of the Joker to power through the criminal underworld of Gotham. He's a pretty terrifying figure."
"I think that's what Chris Nolan does so well, is that he manages to make really entertaining movies that you can watch just for the sheer adrenaline rush of them, but he also manages to incorporate an awful lot of thought and intelligence," Bale said of the new villains. "He brings in ethical questions — things that, if you wish, you can dwell on and consider later."
"A lot of [the Joker] came from Heath himself and conversations we had very early on," Nolan said of the character's ultra-violent, anti-establishment ways. "We talked about Alex in 'A Clockwork Orange,' we talked about Johnny Rotten and Sid Vicious, having a younger approach to the Joker, really tapping into what can be threatening about a guy like this. It seemed that the youthful-anarchy idea [worked best]. It is that fear of a teenager, the fear of the rebel in society that some of these people embody and that gave us the idea of having a little bit of a punk aesthetic to it."
In "Dark Knight," Nolan explained, Gotham is the Joker's town — and everybody else is just living in it. "I felt like I really had to get on and [finish Ledger's work], and I felt very fortunate to have something like that to get on with," he said. "The truth is, the performance is so iconic. It's so not Heath Ledger; it is the Joker. He just inhabits it. It's riveting to watch this incredible performance. I am very proud to work with him on this. I know he was very proud of the role, and I am very excited to show it to people. I think they are going to be blown away."
Teasing Batman
'Dark Knight' promoters use genre-bending ways to tantalize potential viewers.
By Chris Lee, Los Angeles Times
THE billboards arrived without fanfare or explanation in more than a dozen major cities last May. Bearing two simple catch phrases, "Harvey Dent for district attorney" and "I believe in Harvey Dent," they featured a photo of a stately Dent (imagine Eliot Spitzer with a shock of blond hair) against an American flag.
But within 72 hours, each billboard had been defaced by identical graffiti: The candidate's eyes were scrawled over with black rings, his lips crudely rouged with a smeary, clown-like grin. As well, each of the placards' messages had been altered to read: "I believe in Harvey Dent TOO."
Although not outwardly advertising anything other than Dent's political aspirations (never mind the impossibility of running for D.A. in more than one city), the billboards were in fact the opening salvo of one of the most interactive movie-marketing campaigns ever hatched by Hollywood: a multi-platform, hidden-in-plain-sight promotional blitz for the new Batman movie "The Dark Knight," which stars Christian Bale and Heath Ledger and reaches theaters on July 18.
By employing a variety of untraditional awareness-building maneuvers and starting the film's promo push strategically, more than a year before the film's release, marketers at the firm 42 Entertainment (subcontracted by the film's distributor, Warner Bros.) seem to have struck a chord with "The Dark Knight's" core constituency: fanboys and comic-book geeks. The promotional efforts -- part viral marketing initiative, part "advertainment" -- fit into an absorbing, nascent genre-bending pastime called alternate reality gaming that have been the toast of movie and comic blogs for months.
"The Dark Knight" is hardly the only summer action flick to step up its Internet game in anticipation of the tent-pole season: Trailers for " Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" are spreading across the Web like kudzu since being turned into "widgets" -- small, portable applications that can be posted on social networking sites and blogs by marketers for its distributor, Paramount. Earlier this month, HarperCollins Children's Books launched a "read it before you see it" global digital campaign tying in the film "The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian" with the C.S. Lewis children's classic from which it was adapted.
And then there's good, old-fashioned movie salesmanship: The trailer for "Iron Man" has been streamed 3.7 million times on Yahoo Movies since it was launched in September.
So to stand out, "The Dark Knight's" alternate reality game (ARG for short) is mashing up advertising, scavenger-hunting and role-playing in a manner that variously recalls "The X-Files" and the play "Tony n' Tina's Wedding," "The Matrix" and the board game Clue -- all in the name of galvanizing a community of fans to bond (with the new Batman and each other) over the course of a wild goose chase.
Or to be more precise, a wild Joker chase -- one that so far has involved clues spelled out in skywriting, secret meeting points, cellphones embedded inside cakes, Internet red herrings, DIY fan contests and even fake political rallies. Moreover, last week several players were nearly arrested in Chicago while engaging in civil disobedience to promote the movie; others have even been "kidnapped" and "murdered" over the course of the game.
Befitting the campaign's covert-ops M.O., neither Warner Bros. nor 42 Entertainment would comment for this story. But as Jonathan Waite, founder of the Alternate Reality Gaming Network (www.argn.com) sees it, "The Dark Knight's" multifaceted promo push transcends marketing to exist as a standalone cultural event.
"This is looked upon as viral marketing, but you have to look at it as an engrossing experience -- you have people getting very attached to the game," Waite said. "You're not a passive onlooker, you're taking an active role. And any time you take an active role, you're emotionally connecting. That's why people keep coming back: You make personal connections with others and a community gets built."
'Take back Gotham City'
As any Bat-fanatic will tell you, the Dent propaganda is meant to conjure Batman's "Dark Knight" nemesis, politician turned crime kingpin Two Face (a role memorably embodied by Tommy Lee Jones in 1995's "Batman Forever;" Two Face is played by Aaron Eckhart in the new movie). Early in the "Dark Knight" marketing campaign, an official website for the film redirected viewers to www.ibelieveinharveydent.com -- a URL notably lacking any references to Batman that urges "concerned Gotham citizens" to "take back Gotham City" by backing the candidate's run for district attorney.
More specifically, it tells them how to get involved in a faux grass-roots political campaign through initiatives such as filming videos, writing "Take Back Gotham" songs and coming out to meet the "Dentmobile," now touring several dozen American cities.
On March 12, however, a rally for the fictional D.A. candidate was broken up by Chicago police who seemed perplexed in the face of a group of volunteers handing out Harvey Dent bumper stickers, buttons and T-shirts.
Taking the self-referentiality a step further, another website, www.ibelieveinharveydenttoo.com provides a tantalizing clue about some connection between the Joker and Two Face that will presumably be explained in the film.
But discovering it takes some work. Call up the site and you'll see a blacked-out page with the message: "Page not found." But pull down "select all" from your browser's edit menu and a none too subtle shout-out to the killer clown is revealed: a pages-long sequence of repeating Ha ha ha's.
"I've never been a fan of the Batman series," writes a poster on the the marketing-analysis blog "Catch Up Lady," "but this sort of thing makes me want to go see it."
A 'top-secret' trailer
Of course, moviedom's paradigm has been shifted by high-impact, low-cost viral marketing campaigns before. Promos for the 1999 indie thriller "The Blair Witch Project" led viewers to believe the movie was a student film gone horribly wrong, resulting in the disappearance and possible murder of a group of Maryland college students. Likewise, stealth Internet marketing for this year's alien-invasion hit "Cloverfield" tantalized moviegoers by keeping them guessing about the movie's subject matter -- and even, initially, its title.
Wired magazine contributing editor Frank Rose has extensively covered the world of alternate reality gaming and credits the "Cloverfield" ARG campaign with helping the film surpass all box office expectations (hauling in nearly $50 million in its opening weekend). The debut of its "top-secret" trailer last July caused a sensation, compelling moviegoers to take to the Net to uncover a host of interlinking websites and viral tie-ins. But Rose feels "Cloverfield" marketers failed to sustain that early critical mass of interest through the film's January release, ultimately squandering its full viral potential.
"It had what looked like was going to be an ARG behind it, but then it fizzled out," Rose said. "Although there was a lot of comment about 'Cloverfield' online, with people looking for clues and debating the clues, things died down and didn't start to heat up again until before the movie was released. It got a pretty big opening weekend, but then ticket sales fell off a cliff. That's an example of what a not terribly well-executed ARG can do."
To date, however, the "Dark Knight" campaign's master stroke has to be its clown-cake giveaway.
In July, specially defaced dollar bills advertising yet another "Dark Knight" Web domain, at www.whysoserious.com were handed out to fans at San Diego's Comic-Con. On the website, the Joker (Ledger in the film) offered Bat-aficionados the chance to become his henchmen with special prizes tempting those willing to carry out his off-line demands. These players gathered at a physical location to obtain a phone number that was written in the sky by a plane, and from there, they embarked on an elaborate scavenger hunt around the city. It all ended with a scene taken from the "Dark Knight" trailer -- a fan being abducted by "thugs" in a Cadillac Escalade and getting symbolically "murdered" by armed men who mistook the player for the Joker.
Before you could say "Holy meta-narrative, Batman!," fan bulletin boards and chat rooms went wild with news after players posted about the staged event online. "I'm staying glued to this ARG until its end," wrote blogger Matt Keyser, "and definitely seeing 'The Dark Knight' when it comes out."
In December, conscientious followers noted a mysterious countdown on WhySoSerious.com that instructed viewers to travel to 22 real-world addresses in cities from coast to coast to pick up a "very special treat" under the name "Robin Banks" (get it?).
Turns out the addresses were bakeries in possession of a number of cakes bearing phone numbers spelled out in icing. Many of those who called the number recoiled in confusion when the cake in front of them began to ring -- cellphones encased in "Gotham City Evidence" bags had been baked directly inside, each containing a phone charger, Joker paraphernalia and explicit instructions to keep the phone with them at all times. In addition to enlisting the players as the Joker's minions, the devices conveyed invitations to special screenings of newly cut "Dark Knight" Imax trailers.
"Wow. You really took the cake! Now put the icing on it," the note says, continuing: "Let's hope your fellow goons come through as well as you. Once all the layers are in place, you'll all get your just desserts."
Similar campaign
Players can thank 42 Entertainment, the marketing firm behind "The Dark Knight" ARG that famously concocted a similar campaign for Nine Inch Nails' chart-topping 2007 album "Year Zero." That well-received alternate reality game involved a dystopian vision of the fictional "year 0000," USB drives left at various concert venues for fans to find, interconnecting websites, murals and recorded phone messages.
Although 42 Entertainment's principal creative executive Jordan Weisman would not comment for this story, Frank Rose got him to explain the operative ideas behind ARGs for an article that appeared in Wired in December.
"His outlook is that people are so bombarded by advertising messages, they automatically tune them out," Rose said. "So he figured out the way to get people's attention was to not shout the message but to hide it and let people discover it. That's been the basis of this genre from the start."
So, how are ARGs going to affect the future of movie marketing? "It's a very powerful marketing tool for a certain kind of product -- especially for a tent-pole like the 'Batman' films," said Rose.
Or, as ARGN.com's Waite couches the debate: "A movie experience is an hour and 45 minutes, you watch it, you can talk about it, you're done. But wouldn't it be cool if you could explore more of it with others and expand the universe yourself? This stuff is tailor-made for movie fans."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XrIogWXcQA
God, I hate her. She's like an untalented Kirsten Dunst (who isn't even that talented) with straighter teeth.
Quote from: Stefen on April 07, 2008, 12:50:38 PM
God, I hate her. She's like an untalented Kirsten Dunst (who isn't even that talented) with straighter teeth.
yeah, but lesbians love her, though.
Quote from: bonanzataz on April 07, 2008, 03:21:30 PM
Quote from: Stefen on April 07, 2008, 12:50:38 PM
God, I hate her. She's like an untalented Kirsten Dunst (who isn't even that talented) with straighter teeth.
yeah, but lesbians love her, though.
Lesbians are untalented too. They deserve eachother.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whysoserious.com%2Fitsallpartoftheplan%2Fimages%2F201949id1_a.jpg&hash=4f04293af4bb8cd9d10b69b151e91ba979c8d7d6)
beautiful.
coulda lost the second batman logo behind the title, though. i don't think anyone would've been confused about the batman involvement.
Looks like Batman had an assignment for Project Mayhem.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmoviesmedia.ign.com%2Fmovies%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F869%2F869862%2Fthe-dark-knight-20080428083006072_640w.jpg&hash=56cb40796c01c32a1869b0cd1d475b6b02853a5f)
Too cgi-ish, after the great mayhem poster how can they release this one?
TDK will make Batman Begins look like the 60's batsitcom.
Quote from: Fernando on April 28, 2008, 01:58:18 PM
Too cgi-ish, after the great mayhem poster how can they release this one?
prolly b/c the mayhem poster caused a bit of mayhem (http://gawker.com/search/dark%20knight%20poster/) in the news for being a tad 9/11-y.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogsmithmedia.com%2Fwww.cinematical.com%2Fmedia%2F2008%2F04%2Fdark-knight042808.jpg&hash=23201d0d00b9515baab729798b99265ead863227)
new trailer (worst quality ever): http://www.bigshinyrobot.com/reviews/archives/177
Quote from: modage on April 29, 2008, 08:04:34 PM
new trailer (worst quality ever): http://www.bigshinyrobot.com/reviews/archives/177
A Jokerfied version here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3OqlNyE18I&eurl=http://lj-toys.com/?journalid=3616053&moduleid=24391&auth_token=sessionless:1209560400:embedcontent:3616053iurl=http://s1.ytimg.com/vi/H3OqlNyE18I/default.jpg)
Quote from: modage on April 29, 2008, 08:04:34 PM
new trailer (worst quality ever): http://www.bigshinyrobot.com/reviews/archives/177
I really wish I wouldn't have watched this. Give a better warning next time!
new trailer (best quality ever): http://www.whysoserious.com/happytrails/trailer.htm
:sleeping: :saywhat: :shock:
As fantastic as Iron Man was, seeing this trailer before it really kept things in perspective. Iron Man is a great comic book movie and nothing more...The Dark Knight will be that something more.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogsmithmedia.com%2Fwww.cinematical.com%2Fmedia%2F2008%2F05%2Fjoker-banner-%282%29.jpg&hash=5418b14cef488ef71e5245a5405087c7a39f8275)
i'd like to congratulate warner brothers for their 100th poster of this movie. keep 'em coming, boys!
Trailer for Batman Gotham Knight.
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=32526530
Looks good.
I've just realized something. Heath Ledger's Joker is channeling Tom Waits through his voice. Listen to the joker in the latest trailer and then listen to Tom Waits telling a story in his normal speaking voice. Wow.
I'm stoned, too.
Knight's Joker Is A Punk
Christopher Nolan, writer/director of the upcoming Batman sequel film The Dark Knight, told SCI FI Wire that he envisioned a punk rock pioneer as his inspiration for Heath Ledger's Joker character. Nolan--whose Dark Knight cast member Gary Oldman famously played Sex Pistols member Sid Vicious in a film biography--said he had in mind Vicious' band mate Johhny Rotten when conceiving of the new Joker.
"We very much took the view in looking at the character of the Joker that what's strong about him is this idea of anarchy," Nolan said in an interview in June 2007 during a break in filming on the sequel's Chicago set, a former post office that stood in for both Gotham National Bank and a Gotham Police station.
In The Dark Knight, Gotham City police Lt. Jim Gordon (Oldman), district attorney Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart) and Batman (Christian Bale) have organized crime on the run. But they soon find themselves dealing with a new threat: a rising criminal mastermind known as the Joker (Ledger), who thrusts Gotham into anarchy and edges the Dark Knight ever closer to the line separating hero and vigilante.
Nolan said that the Joker's commitment was key. "This commitment to anarchy," he said. "This commitment to chaos. So he's not just a bank robber or an ordinary criminal who is out for material gain. His chief motivation would be that of an anarchist."
Ledger, who died in January after completing his role as the Joker, had a hand in developing certain ideas about the character late in the writing phase, Nolan said. "I talked to Heath a lot about it, even [while] we were finishing the script, and we both agreed that that is the most threatening force, really, in a way, that society faces: ... pure anarchy of someone who wants to do harm purely for its own sake and for his own entertainment," he said. The Dark Knight opens July 18.
alternate..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65zKQYpjpiE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65zKQYpjpiE)
Quote from: modage on July 20, 2006, 01:48:23 PM
LET ME JUST PRAY TO GOD ALOUD THAT THIS IS NOT TRUE> PLEASE GOD, DO NOT PUT HEATH LEDGER IN A BATMAN FILM. THANK YOU LORD.
11 23 months later (and 1 month to go) i just want to apologize to Heath Ledger and the Lord. every shot of The Joker that i've seen is completely iconic. even if this movie sucks, it's still going to be my favorite movie this year.
HUGE SPOILER / DONT WATCH
http://www.whysoserious.com/myhero
the IMAX midnight show July 17 is already sold out. now i'm upset.
Nolan's Chicago Knight
The Dark Knight director dishes from the set of the sequel.
As effectively as he resuscitated the Batman movie franchise with Batman Begins, Christopher Nolan did end up creating a big problem for himself -- namely, how to top himself? The answer, it seemed, was twofold: bring in Batman's most famous adversary, The Joker; and get a top-notch actor to lend him just the right amount of murderous insanity. After Heath Ledger was cast, images of a fey, colorful but otherwise harmless Joker were little more than fuzzy memories and Nolan's sequel, called The Dark Knight, finally had the right counterpoint to balance out the caped crusader's questionable morality.
On June 29, 2007, IGN visited the Chicago set of The Dark Knight. In addition to watching a scene between Christian Bale and Gary Oldman, we joined a group of online media outlets to discuss the movie with various members of the cast and crew. In between scenes, Nolan himself spoke to the group about Batman's evolution, the escalation of danger in Gotham City, and maintaining both entertainment value and artistic integrity with this second installment.
Q: What can you tell us about the scene we were just watching?
Christopher Nolan: Gosh, we should have finished it before lunch and didn't. What can I tell you about that? It's the first scene between Batman and Gordon in the film and it does a lot of stage setting, scene setting for talking about the time that has past between the first film and this film.
Q: My five year old wants for see this film really badly. Is Heath Ledger going to scare the crap out of him and he's going to have to have years of therapy?
Nolan: Yes, definitely. I wouldn't take a five year old. I'd wait a few years.
Q: Can you talk about Heath's performance?
Nolan: What Heath's doing is very unique and really I think pretty amazing and very frightening as the character should be. There's a wicked sense of humor to it, but he's extremely entertaining. He's definitely taking it in a very intense, very scary direction.
Q: The name Johnny Rotten has already come up twice in regards to The Joker. Is the character based upon him?
Nolan: Well, we very much took the view in looking at the character of Joker that he... what's strong about him is this idea of anarchy -- this commitment to anarchy, this commitment to chaos. So he's not just a bank robber or an ordinary criminal who's out for material gain. His chief motivation would be that of anarchist. I talked to Heath a lot about it even as we were writing the script, finishing the script I should say. And we both agreed that, to me, that's the most threatening force that society faces -- that of pure anarchy, someone who wants do harm really for it's own sake and his own entertainment.
Q: In past Batman films The Joker has had henchmen. Is he going to here or is he the whole threat?
Nolan: Well, let's just say that he's the type of individual that attracts a certain type of individual to him and is able to recruit a certain type of individual to him.
Q: In Lindy Hemming's discussion of The Joker costume, she said she was looking for a reason why he would dress this way and initially came to the conclusion that's just who he is.
Nolan: That is and that's the way of the comics, too. If you read the first couple of appearances, he just is, and I think that's absolutely why we wound up going that direction. Because we had set out to do a more realistic version of a character that's been done before, so it fits into our somewhat more realistic, slightly grittier world view of the Batman universe. But ultimately, you accept that the character just is that way. That becomes the most realistic way of doing it, rather than trying to find [an origin]. We didn't want to be trying to find real world explanations to every aspect of this character. What we realized is that to a certain extent the flamboyance of the character is who he is.
Q: He's a force of nature?
Nolan: Yeah, he's a force of nature. And once you start thinking of the character as a given, as he just is who he is, then the psychology of that becomes immediately very obvious and the idea that he's a very usable character -- a very anarchic character in our society, to me -- starts to seem quite obvious.
Q: What was it that made you want to revisit the world of Batman? What did you not say in the first film that you wanted to come back for?
Nolan: I think for me really, certainly addressing the character of The Joker has a lot to do with it. I mean, overall I just very much enjoyed making the first film though I had no real intention of doing a sequel. But having created a view of Batman's universe and at the end of the film we introduced the idea or the thought of The Joker, that to me becomes an irresistible creative process that myself, David Goyer and Jonah [Nolan] sort of got into. It's just a very interesting thing to sit around and think, "OK, how does it work? Batman without powers, how does that affect where we see Joker, [and] who would that guy be in our universe?"
Q: What comic books did you refer to in fleshing out this iteration of The Joker? The way he looks reminds one of certain versions of The Joker written by Ed Brubaker, for example.
Nolan: To be honest, myself and David Goyer just thought of... in our talking specifically about comics -- he has an incredible knowledge about all the comic books -- we just really kind of dove in and tried to do our version of the character simply based on our memories of the comics, you know, without going back. And when Jonah came on board to write the first draft from our treatment, one of the things he specifically said was, "Did you look at the first appearances of the character?" And I said, "No." And then we went back and looked at those as we were writing the script and we wound up, I think, very, very close to the original jumping off point of the character in the history of the comics. In visual terms, we really tried to just go our own way and work with Heath in developing what we thought would be the look of the character. Basically, it winds up being an amalgam looking at everything that's been done with the character -- just processing, just having the time. And, fortunately, we really did have the time; I was talking to David Goyer about that earlier before we started shooting. Just ruminating, just allowing our imaginations to remember what we remembered, and take what we took from the history of the comics and put it all together -- which is very much how we approached Batman in the first film.
Q: What in your mind makes a good sequel? What pitfalls were you perhaps trying to avoid?
Nolan: I think that what makes a good sequel is a film that feels inevitable and that when you go back and see the first film you completely understand that the story had to continue with a second film. And I wouldn't be making this film if I didn't have that feeling about a story and how that has to continue across. I think the pitfalls are simply repeating yourself -- repeating yourself but on a bigger scale. That's something we're not doing at all. We're really very much creating a second half to the story.
Q: Do you have any feeling about the inevitability of a third film?
Nolan: No, I'm really just making this film. Honestly, I'm sure I could look back and say at all the things I talked about when I was doing the first film because I wanted everything to be on the first film. That was a very genuine process, and for me having a great story of two halves is something really in accord with this movie. So when people see this movie they really feel that they have seen a complete story.
Q: What did the actors think about coming back and reprising their roles?
Nolan: Well, I think they're all pretty excited just about the nature of the material and where the story took them. And the great thing about doing a sequel that I didn't really know until we dove into it is that you've set up all the characters, so you don't have to take that time with the audience. So you can really take them further, you can jump in with them; there's a nice familiarity to them as they appear on-screen, as they first pop off. So you can do a little more with each of them, and you can do it in slightly less time, which in a way you have to because you have more characters. And we're introducing new characters, so you try not to make a four hour movie. That shorthand you have with characters you already know is tremendously valuable.
Q: Along those lines of the supporting actors, your Batman films relative to other superhero films, have a pretty huge amount of supporting characters. What criteria do you use to decide which characters to bring in? For example, do you have a need for a female police officer and call her Rene Montoya?
Nolan: Yeah, well it's not Rene Montoya. We looked at using her, but we wanted to change the character from the way the character is in the comics so we changed the name, and she became a different character -- and that's part of our process. We look at: What are the demands of our story based on our reading of various comics? As the story starts to shape itself, there's a certain sense in which you decide which characters are we representing and which have changed a bit and therefore need to be our own characters and in what way the history of the comics is helping you tell your story. So that's kind of the best way I can describe the process. There are certain legalistic aspects. I'll sit there with Goyer saying, "Wouldn't it be great if this happened or if we had a character do this?" And he'll say, "Oh, that's so and so from such and such." And he has a great knowledge of the comics, so it's very fun to run over stuff with him.
Q: In the first film you say that things are going to get worse before they get better. Can you elaborate on what that means in terms of the story and in terms of the tone?
Nolan: Well, I think it's really more the idea. It's not necessarily things are going to get worse before they get better, although that's certainly a theme in this film. But really the key point is Gordon's little speech about escalation and the idea of such a radical response to crime and prompting its own radical nature. And at the end of the first film when The Joker's card is presented, it is very clear that was our idea of yes, Batman succeeded, but at the same time he's going to prompt a very extreme response. And in this film, that's the jumping off point -- the very extreme response to Batman's war on crime.
Q: Has he overcome his past or is he more a man on a mission to clean up Gotham?
Nolan: I think he is a more complete version of himself, as it were. I think he is... he has moved on and he is less tortured by his distant past. So we get to torture him more with fresh ones. He's never entirely free from torture, one might say.
Q: As we read in the comics, it seems like at a certain point you've got to make him more heroic.
Nolan: Yes, he can't mope; he can't have a self indulgent angst. He has to be substantial. We try to tell a story in the first film whereby he did confront and overcome various aspects of what drives him, of the angst, and left others to hang. So in this film we try to have the character, Christian Bale's character, start from that point of he's not sitting around moping about the fact that his parents were killed, etc. [because] we dealt with that in the first film. But he's nevertheless a very dark character.
Q: Can you talk about the IMAX scenes that you're shooting and would you ever consider shooting a Batman film in 3-D?
Nolan: We're shooting various of the action scenes for the film in IMAX format. And as we progress, I'm still trying to convince everybody to shoot more and more bits of it in IMAX. It's a very unwieldy and burdensome format, but it's really a pretty incredible thing to look at and I'm just having a blast working with that format. I've never been particularly interested in 3-D because to me one of the things that's just amazing -- one of the things that I'm trying to get back to and that I love about movies -- is their larger than life quality. And it's a peculiar thing with the way your eyes work: When you wear 3-D glasses and look at a 3-D image, the screen appears to be small. If you're shooting close-ups in a 3-D... I mean, next time you go to see a 3-D film, put your glasses on and the screen shrinks to this size because you're five feet away from the person. [And then] you take your glasses off and suddenly it's massive again. And I'm interested in the massive canvas -- in that larger than life canvas that IMAX gives you and you create an immersive quality by the clarity and the size and brightness of the images. So that gives you a great physical sense, like you would get in a 3-D movie, but it doesn't diminish the scale of it. So you're still dealing with a huge, larger than life canvas, that I think is the best way to use that format. I also hate wearing those glasses.
Q: [Editor's Note: Poor recording quality prohibited clear transcription of this question.]
Nolan: To give an obscure answer to an obscure question, there are fascist aspects to a masked vigilante running around, and even what we've done with the symbol. There are very dangerous aspects of the character, and everything we try and do with the story is explore those aspects. And we constantly ask ourselves in the writing of the film and the making of the film, "Why is Batman a hero? Why is he a good guy?" And that's one of the reasons I think that there are certain directions we could take, and some of the fans would like to see you take, with this character that are very dark and very intense. But there always has to be this guiding idea of heroism. Batman is a good guy, and that's an important question to continually ask because there are parts of his mythology that have in the past been co-opted by disreputable and horrible aspects of humanity, so it's a very important question to ask in the making of the film. Why is he a hero?
Q: There's a quote attributed to you that said Superman is sort of the way that America views itself and Batman is the way that the rest of the world views America.
Nolan: That's fantastic that that's attributed to me, but it's not my quote. It's Michael Caine's. No he said it to me the first time I met him. I thought it was very interesting. I thought it was a very interesting point of view.
Q: Is that something that informed your development of the character or story?
Nolan: Only in the sense that Superman is an ideal of something. And I think of Batman -- being the more human character -- is not as ideal, and is having to deal with the consequences of his actions in a more relatable, more human, and a more political way. So that's what I love about the character because the story gets messy; it's not always easy to figure out, "What is the heroic course of action? What is OK to do? What is the line you can't cross as a vigilante as somebody who works outside of the law technically?" And this story gets to really explore those issues.
Q: All of your films are meticulously plotted. Was there anything that you were not able to work into this story?
Nolan: You know, I mean... honestly, we really pretty much stuffed everything I wanted into the movie. My biggest fear right now is just there's a lot to put in that we're shooting. And when we get to finishing the film, we'll have to be somewhat ruthless about how we put it together. But yeah, we're telling a very dense story and a very sprawling story with a lot of characters, a lot of plotlines, a lot of things going on. So I kind of didn't leave anything out. And I thought that that would be part of the problem doing a sequel actually -- that you're jumping into the story of a character we've introduced to the audience very fully formed. We're not having to deal with the origin of the character, so you've got a good head start. We really wanted to be as ambitious as possible with the scope of the movie and what we put into it.
Q: What's the one scene in this movie that you can't wait to show audiences?
Nolan: You sort of try and fall in love with every scene as you shoot it. [But] we've already shot some scenes that I'm extremely excited about; a lot of them... I mean, we're doing some pretty grand-scale action things in the IMAX format as it will be and I'm very excited just to get those done. But a lot of the character scenes -- scenes that are more intimate, scenes between The Joker and the Batman -- are some of the most intriguing in the film, some of the most involved. But I wouldn't really want to say. We have to finish it and then know.
Q: Does Batman fulfill more of his role as a detective in this film?
Nolan: Yes, he definitely I think much more easily in this story assumes more of a detective role. There was something that was important to get in the first film and we got it in a small way, but in dealing with the origin and in dealing with all larger aspects of the character it became very difficult to get that in. Actually, it's an answer to the earlier question of what we tried to put in this film that we couldn't get into the first film and him as detective is definitely one of those aspects.
Quote from: modage on June 21, 2008, 11:00:54 AM
the IMAX midnight show July 17 is already sold out. now i'm upset.
Condolences.
...Do you know if they show cinemascope movies in their original 2.35:1 aspect for IMAX screenings?
edit: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/37285
Quotesure you’ve read that Nolan decided to shoot six major sequences in the film in IMAX. This is the first time a major studio narrative film has lensed sequences in the format. The cameras are a nightmare to move, they hold only three minutes of film, and they’re so noisy it makes it almost impossible to record dialogue live. Even so, I’ll bet we see Nolan work in the format again, because the results are so immersive and startling that they’re worth whatever headaches are involved. The way it works is the IMAX sequences are all projected full frame, so they fill the entire eight-story screen at a ratio of 1.44:1. When the IMAX sequences end, the movie pops into a 2.40:1 letterboxed ratio that’s still pretty damn gigantic. And for regular theaters showing the film, you’ll see everything at 2.40:1, although I’m willing to bet you notice a marked visual difference for certain scenes. It’s not just the size of an IMAX frame... it’s the clarity. It’s the way you get lost in it and no matter where you work, there’s some detail you can notice that might otherwise be lost. It’s the way each motion of the camera pulls you in and makes you feel like you’re moving with it. But more than anything, it’s the way the faces of the actors tower over you, the operatic emotion of this piece cranked up even further by the sheer scale of things. When you look into someone’s eyes, you get a sense of who they are. And in IMAX? It’s like you can see right inside them, which only makes Ledger’s work more disturbing.
I've just watched the IMAX prologue included with the new Blu-ray release and not only does it look fantastic but the comparisons to Heat (which seems to be in most of the early reviews) are appropriate.
New Trailer here. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_-NEBvaJHM)
Somebody sent me this, written by Kevin Smith in his blog:
"Courtesy of Peter Sciretta over at SlashFilm.com, I caught an early screening of "The Dark Knight" yesterday evening.Without giving anything away, this is an epic film (and trust me: based on the sheer size and scope of the visuals and storytelling, that's not an overstatement). It's the "Godfather II" of comic book films and three times more earnest than "Batman Begins" (and fuck, was that an earnest film). Easily the most adult comic book film ever made. Heath Ledger didn't so much give a performance as he disappeared completely into the role; I know I'm not the first to suggest this, but he'll likely get at least an Oscar nod (if not the win) for Best Supporting Actor. Fucking flick's nearly three hours long and only leaves you wanting more (in a great way). I can't imagine anyone being disappointed by it. Nolan and crew have created something close to a masterpiece."
Quote from: kal on July 01, 2008, 10:16:24 AM
Somebody sent me this
haha yeah, cover your ass.
Quote from: modage on June 21, 2008, 11:00:54 AM
the IMAX midnight show July 17 is already sold out. now i'm upset.
i got non-IMAX tickets to my fav screen in the city Lincoln Sq #1 for midnight. and i also got tickets to see it in IMAX on Tues since i will be home for the weekend. i will definitely have to see it over the weekend with my dad who is a huge Batman fan. and my friend who used to work at DC Comics is seeing if she can get us into a screening before it comes out. so in the first week i will be seeing this at least 3, possibly 4 times. now i'm excited.
Quote from: Hedwig on July 01, 2008, 10:38:26 AM
Quote from: kal on July 01, 2008, 10:16:24 AM
Somebody sent me this
haha yeah, cover your ass.
LOL I know how it sounds but they did send it to me... I didn't know he had a blog :)
Mod, have you warmed up to the Ledger casting? I remember you were pretty upset about it when it was announced.
If this makes a ton of money (and it's pretty sure it will), with the critical acclaim we are witnessing...could it be possible this thing ends up being a best picture oscar nominee? For tenet goddam years we've been seeing Batman movies ranging from the great (Batman Returns, Batman Begins) to the innovative (Batman) to the cheesy (Batman Forever) to the plain awful (you know)...
I know, who gives a fuck, right? But maybe more people will watch the Oscars if a box office hit that is also a quality popcorn summer movie is nominated. Or maybe they'll nominate the next Juno as their audience friendly option.
Quote from: Stefen on July 01, 2008, 03:26:14 PM
Mod, have you warmed up to the Ledger casting? I remember you were pretty upset about it when it was announced.
yep.
Quote from: modage on June 15, 2008, 11:28:26 PM
Quote from: modage on July 20, 2006, 01:48:23 PM
LET ME JUST PRAY TO GOD ALOUD THAT THIS IS NOT TRUE> PLEASE GOD, DO NOT PUT HEATH LEDGER IN A BATMAN FILM. THANK YOU LORD.
11 23 months later (and 1 month to go) i just want to apologize to Heath Ledger and the Lord. every shot of The Joker that i've seen is completely iconic. even if this movie sucks, it's still going to be my favorite movie this year.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogsmithmedia.com%2Fwww.cinematical.com%2Fmedia%2F2008%2F07%2Fdkposter1-%25283%2529.jpg&hash=13aa94e986699cff4a758fddd6bdeccc61f11e52)
aw, that's cute.
Nolan Mulls Third Bat-Movie
Source: SciFi Wire
Christopher Nolan, the writer/director who continues reinventing the Batman franchise with the upcoming sequel film The Dark Knight, told reporters that he hasn't begun to think about doing a third installment--though at least one of his cast members thinks otherwise.
After Nolan completed the first of his Caped Crusader reboots, 2005's Batman Begins, Dark Knight writers David S. Goyer and Jonathan Nolan (Christopher's brother) told reporters that the director challenged them to give him a story so compelling that he had no choice but to make a second movie. They apparently did: Nolan's The Dark Knight opens this month with a new story and new characters, led by the late Heath Ledger's Joker and Aaron Eckhart's Gotham City district attorney Harvey Dent, joining a returning Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman.
What would it take for Christopher Nolan to do a third film? "Enormous amounts of cash," Nolan joked in a group interview in Beverly Hills, Calif., over the weekend.
No, seriously. "I don't know," Nolan said, adding: "The only way I can answer that question--there are two ways. The first thing to say is, I literally finished this film last week. That was when we finished our IMAX prints. So I have no idea what I'm going to do next, what I'll do in the future."
Nolan added: "The film to me is not actually finished until the audience sees it and tells me what it is, really. So it's too early to say for all those kind of reasons. The other thing to be said on the subject is we absolutely did not feel in taking on the idea of doing the second film that we could in any way hamper ourselves or disadvantage ourselves by saving things for another film. ... I think that's a mistake people have made in the past, thinking too much of the future. I think you have to put all your eggs into one basket and make as great a film as you can, and that's what we've tried to do."
But Gary Oldman, who plays police detective Jim Gordon, is pretty sure Nolan will sign on for a third film.
"Chris Nolan, ... he comes in, and then you'll say, 'Are you going to do the sequel?'" Oldman said in a separate interview. "And he sits here and he goes, 'I don't know. I'm kind of tired. I'm going to go on holiday.' Which I think is code for yes." The Dark Knight opens July 18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Knight Shifts Batman Genre
Christopher Nolan, director of the Batman sequel film The Dark Knight, told reporters that his ambition was to make the franchise bigger and smaller at the same time by shifting genres from superhero-origin story to urban crime drama.
"There's a huge advantage being able to jump in having told the origin story, so you can jump in with a fully formed character and then see where that goes," Nolan said in a group interview in Beverly Hills, Calif., over the weekend. "So I think it definitely gives you the opportunity to go new places and to get into the story much faster."
In The Dark Knight, Gotham City has seen crime lowered by the presence of Batman (Christian Bale), who is working with police detective Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman), and a new crusading district attorney, Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart), has been elected. But a sinister new villain, the Joker (the late Heath Ledger), appears, casting doubt on the moral choices made by all and challenging Bruce Wayne to confront his darkest impulses.
"I had very much enjoyed the rhythm and dynamic of the origin story that we got to tell in Batman Begins, so it was a little bit daunting how we were going to replace that, the feeling of scale and size that gave us, just the timespan of that story," Nolan said. "And so what we chose to do is to tell a very immediate, very linear story, but based on a slight genre shift, going a little more into the crime story, a little more into the kind of epic city stories of films like Michael Mann's Heat, things like that, which I think achieve great scale even though they're confined within one city."
In his own interview, Bale said that viewers will find themselves immersed in a Gotham City that feels authentic. "We see an even more realistic-appearing Gotham, the characters, and I think he's really nailed it with his ability to take a certain genre of movie but not have it be constricted by that genre, you know?" Bale said. "And [he] truly has made a superb story, and finely crafted movie, that I think stands up against any movie regardless of genre."
The murky morality of The Dark Knight is particularly relevant now, Bale added. "Clearly that's very relevant to America: the question of what kind of deals do you do with the devil in order to solve a problem quickest," he said. "But are you then setting yourself up for future problems and more dire circumstances and consequences?" The Dark Knight opens July 18.
http://www.incontention.com/?p=667#comments
audio of press junket. really good stuff so far. remember: spoiler in the eckhart interview around 11:00. edit: and a slight one in the maggie gylenhaal around 5:00-6:00.. there's one really annoying guy.
the new american cinematographer magazine has a real great piece on the pains that went into shooting IMAX. so this might be my first imax movie.
I'd link it but the online version is still not up.
shitload of clips
http://media.movies.ign.com/media/752/752133/vids_1.html
other clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4FZdsIDsKE&
http://www.studiodaily.com/main/technique/tprojects/9645.html
IMAXimizing The Dark Knight
How Shooting, Lighting, Focus, Audio and Back Pains Were All Worth It
Debra Kaufman
June 30, 2008
Post your comments below
The Dark Knight, the latest "episode" in the Batman series, opens July 18 to great anticipation. The film is made more compelling and poignant by the death of Heath Ledger, who from what we can see in the film's trailer, plays a very dark Joker. But, for aficionados of "behind-the-scenes" stories, The Dark Knight is compelling for other reasons.
Those reasons were discussed at Cine Gear Expo 2008 at the Universal Studios backlot, by a panel, moderated by industry journalist Bob Fisher, consisting of cinematographer Wally Pfister, camera operator Bob Gorelick, chief lighting technician Cory Geryak and IMAX senior VP David Keighley.
From Keighley's point of view, The Dark Knight is a long-time dream come true. "We've tried to get a filmmaker to shoot a film in IMAX for 40 years," says Keighley, who ticks off Coppola's Apocalypse Now as one project he pushed for. "But everyone said, the cameras are too big, too heavy and too noisy."
With The Dark Knight, all the action sequences were shot in IMAX, and later intercut with 35mm film. This film also marks cinematographer Pfister's sixth collaboration with director Chris Nolan, which began with the indie hit Memento and was seen most recently in The Prestige.
As a team, Nolan and Pfister are notable for their efforts to adhere to an "in-camera" ethos. Pfister famously avoids the digital intermediate process that has become commonplace among Hollywood filmmakers for the ability to tweak nearly everything about the image. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," Pfister comments. Though "The Dark Knight" does include digital visual effects, many of the effects are captured in-camera. In one notable sequence an exploding four-storey building was destroyed for the filmmakers, who shot it in Chicago. In other words: What you see in this film may actually have been there on the set.
That makes it all the more impressive that the very intense action sequences, which include the six-minute opening shot of a bank heist, were shot in IMAX. Pfister revealed that he and Nolan have long been fans of the IMAX format. "There's no better image quality," says Pfister. "And Chris wanted to enhance the film-going experience."
In fact, Nolan had an earlier experience using the IMAX format. The 2005 Batman Begins, Nolan and Pfister's first Batman picture, utilized IMAX's DMR (Digital Remastering) process, in which film shot in 35mm is transferred to IMAX's 15/70 format, for sections of the film. "That's what gave Chris the idea of originating in native IMAX," says Pfister. [As an aside, Keighley reported that 22 films have used the DMR process to release IMAX versions.]
But Nolan and Pfister didn't plunge headlong into IMAX production. "We shot lots of tests in Chris' garage," says Pfister. "Very guerilla-style, we drove down Hollywood Blvd. without a permit, shooting. We needed to get an idea what we were getting ourselves into."
Next, Nolan began to pick scenes he wanted to do in IMAX. "He had to sell the studio," says Pfister, who admits he was excited to shoot in IMAX, whose image is 9.5 times bigger than anamorphic 35mm. "He needed to answer in his own mind if he could finish the film within the post schedule."
He decided he could, and, ultimately, 28 minutes of the film were shot in full IMAX. "It was very detailed and very complicated, but we wanted people to see it on the IMAX screen," says Pfister. Keighley noted that Nolan also likes the sound mix best in IMAX. The IMAX theatre is a digital surround sound system that delivers multi-channel, uncompressed, full fidelity sound. IMAX's amplifiers generate up to 14,000 watts of power. That opening bank heist sequence, says Pfister, is notable for the IMAX sound because where the gunshots are both very loud and seem very close.
But an IMAX camera also weighs in at 100 pounds, compared to the Panaflex's 32 pounds. Because Nolan favors a hand-held look, the first test of shooting in IMAX was Gorelick's ability to operate the 100-pound Steadicam rig. That test came immediately, with the shoot's first filmed sequence: the movie's demanding opening sequence. The bank heist was located in an old post office, with very hard, very slick marble floors. "Bob had to do a running shot with the Steadicam and the arm broke off," remembers Pfister. "My back was stressing," admits Gorelick.
"At the beginning, Chris [Nolan] asked if we could do anything with this camera," Pfister adds. "At the end, he'd ask, is that as fast as you can run? It became second nature after awhile."
Framing for IMAX is quite different than for a 35mm image, said Gorelick. "You leave much more headroom," he said. "The cross-hair is just under the eyeline. The practical reason for that so that audiences don't have to crane their heads back to see. For a production like this, they extract whatever part of the negative they want, and it was usually the center."
Geryak reports that lighting wasn't that different than a typical 35mm shoot. "The biggest problem was hiding the lights," he says. "In the post office where the opening scene takes place, there were 12 big windows. We put up one Xenon light per window. With the IMAX camera, you get a lot of clarity; you can see all the details."
Shooting in IMAX also had a nuanced impact on the editing, by Lee Smith, said Pfister. "Christopher was very conscious of the IMAX format," he said. "In the opening, six-minute bank heist, which was cut during principle photography, they let scenes linger on the screen a little bit more [than usual]."
Pfister added that director Nolan didn't want to treat The Dark Knight any differently from an ordinary 35mm film. "We did all the conventional things we've done with 35mm for years." Pfister also credited "two great key grips, [gaffer] Perry Evans in London, fabulous focus pullers, and IMAX consultant Wayne Baker." Depth of field is very difficult in IMAX, he says. "The fastest lenses are 2.8; one gets down to a 1.4, losing flexibility which made it more challenging for Cory and his boys," adds Pfister, who said he used "mostly Hasselblad lenses." "The team did a great job in figuring it out." But he couldn't get the flares he wanted in one end scene. "I always imagined it with flares, but I couldn't quite get them," he said. "There's a much shallower depth of field and the image is very wide."
During production, recounted Pfister, Nolan remarked that, "in a weird way, shooting IMAX is like shooting Super 8mm." "There's only one lab that develops it, it comes in 3-minute loads," says Pfister, half-joking. "And you send it away and get it back in a week, so you have weeklies, not dailies."
The IMAX sequences were scanned at 8K resolution and turned into an anamorphic negative. These sequences that originated in IMAX "probably do look a bit sharper than those shot in 35mm," concludes Pfister. "You can notice a difference," he says. "Even in the material that's gone to DVD, the IMAX material is sharper. "It's called over-sampling," notes Keighley. "It always looks better when you start with a larger format, and it's harder to mess it up."
Shooting in IMAX posed numerous challenges. With only 3 minutes per load, the production used three IMAX cameras. Then there's the weight of the IMAX camera. "I was 6'4" when I started," jokes operator Gorelick. "And now I'm 5'10"."
With the 360-degree sweep of the Steadicam rig, Geryak also found it difficult at times to find places to hide lights. "When we had to light for large action sequences, such as the bank heist, the lights had to be moved further back," says Geryak. "It was trickier."
Finally, and significantly, the cost of shooting in IMAX is four times that of shooting in 35mm, reveals Pfister, who notes that, without a very large camera blimp, productions have to loop sound. "That's why it's too difficult to shoot an entire movie in IMAX," he concludes. "The problems are still a roadblock."
But the IMAX shoot went smoothly, and Pfister raves about the result, after having just seen a screening of an IMAX print. His advice to movie-goers? "You must see this film in IMAX," he says. "It looks beautiful."
:yabbse-undecided:
I'd have to drive for over an hour to see it in IMAX.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fmedia%2Fphoto%2F2008-07%2F40718193.jpg&hash=e59bf81adf4e8b9ccbb4eef7ce143bf989722529)
Christopher Nolan's 'Knight' vision
The director takes Batman to a dark place in a $180-million saga he's dedicating to the late Heath Ledger, who portrays the Joker to Christian Bale's Caped Crusader.
By Geoff Boucher, Los Angeles Times
THE BRITISH filmmaker Christopher Nolan has the mien of a passionate literature professor (passionate, that is, in the British sense of the term) and, last December, he spoke about the young actor Heath Ledger as if he were the most fascinating manuscript to cross his desk in years. "The bold decisions that Heath has made with this performance are fascinating to watch," said Nolan, who had one hand perched on his hip and the other holding a curled finger to his chin. "I think he's done something quite exceptional."
Nolan was in Los Angeles that evening to screen some early completed footage from "The Dark Knight," the second film in his reboot of the Batman mythos, which has Ledger in the role of the Joker. In super-hero cinema, the difference between a good film and a great film is the villain, not the hero, and it's telling that the six-minute sequence that Nolan brought with him did not include a single solitary frame of the franchise's caped crusader, who is again played by the lean and lupine Christian Bale. The screening audience of industry types and journalists were agog over Ledger's wicked and scabby character and, in the cocktail lounge after, Nolan was all smiles. "I really cannot wait," the filmmaker said, "for everyone to see the finished product."
The world will see that product July 18, when "The Dark Knight" opens across the U.S., but Ledger, of course, will not be around to enjoy it. The 28-year-old Aussie and his promising career will be remembered as an unfinished novel. Seven weeks to the day after that screening in Los Angeles, Ledger was found dead in his second-floor loft in New York City. Half a dozen different prescription drugs were found in his system, and an accidental overdose was the determined cause of death.
For Nolan and the cast of "The Dark Knight," the death was a bruising shock and, in the months that followed, an awkward professional challenge. A summer movie with a budget of $180million demands relentless pre-release promotion, but, especially with the always-proper Nolan at the fore, no one in this production wanted to make a crass or maudlin misstep. Nolan stepped forward to write an appreciation of Ledger for Newsweek, and not only was it thoughtful (Nolan on Ledger's short films: "Their exuberance made me feel jaded and leaden. I've never felt as old as I did watching Heath explore his talents."), the essay never once mentioned the film's release date. The cast picked up on the message.
"To have this film be successful and to have people see Heath's great work in it -- to appropriately honor that performance by bringing the film to the audience -- that became the goal for Chris and everyone involved," said Aaron Eckhart, who portrays Harvey "Two-Face" Dent, another grotesque madman who fights Batman for the soul of Gotham City. "Chris gave us a set where the actors felt very secure, they felt they could take risks. And Chris has continued to protect Heath and his performance."
In mid-May, at the Warner Bros. lot in Burbank, Nolan was in the late stages of post-production on "The Dark Knight" and the marathon hours were taking their toll. There was stubble on his chin and half-circles under his eyes. "Come on in," he told his visitor, "but I must warn you it's quite loud inside. I mean, really loud." In the mixing suite, Nolan joined sound editors Lora Hirschberg and Gary Rizzo, who were laboring over a bank of control boards. Up on a huge screen in front of them was a frozen image of Ledger, a rocket-launcher in his hand and an expression of callous menace on his face.
Nolan ran through the scene a dozen times and pulled apart the barrage of different sounds, homing in on what he disliked ("Why am I hearing an air brake there? The truck is speeding up, that's a disconnect.") and what he needed ("In the first film, the roar of the Batmobile that we hear when the headlights first go on; let's go back and get that and use it right here."). The director stretched his neck and exhaled. "OK, we're getting there."
Bigger is better
THIS IS clearly the season -- and the decade, really -- for filmmakers who understand the calculus of explosions and the proper lighting of bulging biceps; Hollywood has been throwing larger-than-life heroes at the cineplex at a dizzying rate, with Iron Man, Indiana Jones, the Hulk, Hancock and Hellboy leading the florid parade. But there is within "The Dark Knight" a level of subversive menace and ambition that sets it apart from the popcorn slugfests, although it may in fact be too unsettling to reach the $300-million box-office numbers of the comparatively sunny exploits of "Iron Man." "The Dark Knight" is many things, but it is not the feel-good movie of the summer.
Nolan looked up at the screen and, again, the image was of Ledger's Joker, his chalk-white face set off by a lipstick "grin" that emphasizes the jagged scars that curl up from the corners of his mouth. Throughout the movie, Ledger probes those scars with his tongue, the way some toothless people incessantly chomp their gums. He also walks with shoulders bowed and his chin out and down, like a hyena. This Joker has green hair and a purple suit, but there's little else that evokes Jack Nicholson's flamboyant take in Tim Burton's 1989 "Batman." Actually, if anything, Ledger here is closer to Nicholson's eerie ferocity in "The Shining."
Stepping out to take a break, Nolan ran a hand through his hair. The 37-year-old was wearing a sports coat and vest -- it's his standard look, far more formal than many of his generation -- and he began to talk about his new film in terms of a search for the dark heart of society and the blood-red line between justice and vengeance. It's still a super-hero gizmo movie, of course, but "The Dark Knight" delves further into Nolan's familiar themes of moral uncertainty, madness and the cost of vendettas, which gave shape to "Memento," "Insomnia," "The Prestige" and his first trip to Gotham, the 2005 "Batman Begins."
That movie grossed $205 million in the U.S., and critics hailed it as the necessary pendulum swing back from Joel Schumacher's campy "Batman & Robin," forever remembered for putting future Oscar winner George Clooney in a nippled Batsuit. It's telling sign of the times that right now, across Hollywood, there is a building buzz that Ledger might receive a posthumous Oscar nomination for his work as the Joker. (If he does, it would couple with Johnny Depp's nomination as Jack Sparrow to prove that summer vehicles are starting to win the artsy heart of Hollywood after occupying its box-office brain this whole decade.)
Nolan cowrote the screenplay for "The Dark Knight" with his younger brother, Jonathan. They also co-wrote "The Prestige" and, before that, "Memento," the $5-million movie that earned them an Oscar nomination for its intricate, reverse-order noir tale. The director said the job hasn't changed with the soaring budget and expectations.
"The job of the director is to consider what particular shot you are shooting and how that shot will advance the story," Nolan said. "There are many, many decisions to be made, but really, if you think of the job in terms that simple, it will guide you to what needs to be done next."
Bale has become Nolan's on-screen muse. Right now, the 34-year-old actor is working with director McG on "Terminator Salvation," and reached on set he was cagey about Nolan.
"I'm afraid I'm going to disappoint you greatly; I'm of the inclination that I won't discuss or analyze an artistic relationship for fear of changing it or undermining it somehow," Bale said. "But clearly he's a director who is very focused and knows what he wants but is open to the collaborative process and finding unexpected things in performances. He makes you feel very safe and prepares you for success."
Is Nolan as unflappable as he seems? "I can tell you that my favorite memories are from these snapshots I have in my mind of Chris just losing it. When he starts laughing, really laughing, he's gone and it's something to see."
Great expectations
THERE weren't too many unforgettable moments at the MTV Movie Awards this year, but there was at least one: A faux "viral video" was shown with Robert Downey Jr. meeting a sullen teenager who had seen "Iron Man" three times. Downey is elated until the pudgy kid gives his review: "It'll do until 'Dark Knight' comes out."
That about sums up the intensity of genre fans who are treating the Nolan franchise as the most astute comic-book adaptation to date -- or at least a contender for that title with Sam Raimi's "Spider-Man" and Bryan Singer's "X-Men." "Batman Begins" took the familiar legend but rooted it in a more realistic Gotham than Burton ever presented and, in many ways, its nihilism pulls as much from Don Siegel's "Dirty Harry" and Martin Scorsese's "Taxi Driver" as it does any Saturday morning cartoon.
" 'Batman Begins' was about the process of Bruce Wayne finding himself and his purpose and making himself an instrument of that purpose," Nolan said. "The advantage of this second film is that he is now fully formed and we can go straight into the story."
"The Dark Knight" will be parsed for political themes -- Batman's trustworthy aide Alfred ( Michael Caine) at one point rebukes his boss for trampling privacy rights in his fight against terrorism -- but Nolan steers clear of too much analysis, at least for the moment. Plot security was intense during shoots in Chicago and Hong Kong to preserve "all the things we want the audience to see for the first time when they sit down in the theater in the dark." A major character is murdered in the film, and when the end credits roll, Batman is in a far darker place.
This much can be said: "The Dark Knight" finds a new political force in Gotham in Harvey Dent, a crusading prosecutor, and a deranged new criminal in the mysterious Joker. Batman, meanwhile, is ready to hang up his cowl after watching the distorted shadows cast by his growing street legend. Back from the first film are cast members Caine, Gary Oldman and Morgan Freeman, while Maggie Gyllenhaal replaces Katie Holmes in the role of Rachel Dawes. For Nolan, the movie is an unsettling crime film, not a super-hero escapade.
"I think in the past there have been movies in the genre, even movies made by very good directors, where there comes a moment where you realize they do take what they are doing seriously," Nolan said. "The approach we have is take the tropes and iconography of the action-hero genre and ground it in a reality. Real life is more tactile, more threatening, more emotional. The experience is amplified. I very much consider it my job to entertain the audience. I learned some things watching 'Batman Begins' in a crowded theater with the audience. . . . I don't make movies for myself."
Leave the small-fry home
ONE OF the secrets that Nolan has guarded the longest with "The Dark Knight" is the visage of Eckhart's Two-Face character after his violent disfigurement that leads him away from law and order and toward ferocious revenge. Nolan's film is PG-13 and is clearly not for young children (there is one sequence, in fact, in which a terrified youngster is directly threatened by one of the villains), but the director said he had actually pulled back on the horror of Two-Face's seared flesh.
"I didn't want people to actually look away so much they were missing the film," Nolan said with a chuckle.
For the Joker, Nolan went back to the first appearance of the character in comics back in 1940, when the leering clown showed up without any sort of back-story and simply started killing people. That's how the Joker enters Nolan's Gotham, not unlike, Nolan pointed out, the toothy intruder of "Jaws."
"You don't care where the shark came from," Nolan said, "you don't care who the shark's parents were."
In one harrowing scene, Ledger does explain his cheek scars to a victim -- and then, later in the film, he delivers a second creepy monologue with an entirely different explanation. The revelation: The Joker is a liar, even to the folks eating the popcorn. It's one of the compelling nuances of the movie. There are many others. Maybe that's why Nolan declined to talk about his own emotional journey with the movie and its lost star. "I think we've said as much as we can about Heath. We want to do right by him. I'm proud of his work in this film, and I'm excited to have it seen, but I think in respect to him and his family, perhaps it's best to just let the film have the final word."
This will be the best poster to come out for this movie:
http://www.latinoreview.com/news/the-dark-knight-got-a-new-poster-4951
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 07, 2008, 09:19:15 AM
This will be the best poster to come out for this movie:
http://www.latinoreview.com/news/the-dark-knight-got-a-new-poster-4951
we totally agree. :yabbse-shocked:
Michael Bay's The Dark Knight
http://my.spill.com/profiles/blog/show?id=947994%3ABlogPost%3A355506
Quote from: Alexandro on July 08, 2008, 11:01:14 AM
Michael Bay's The Dark Knight
http://my.spill.com/profiles/blog/show?id=947994%3ABlogPost%3A355506
bahahhahahaahahahahaaha. PERFECT.
i want to see that movie
Early Rise for The Dark Knight
Crack of dawn screenings already selling out.
With more than a week to go before the highly-anticipated release of The Dark Knight, Fandango reports that many of its pre-opening Thursday midnight shows on July 17 are already sold out in cities across the country, from New York to Boise, Idaho. Theaters continue to add 3:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. showtimes to meet the ticketing demand.
"The Dark Knight may be responsible for a lot of bleary eyes at work next Friday morning," says Rick Butler, Chief Operating Officer for Fandango. "We're seeing a record number of late-night showtimes selling out in advance, while theaters are adding new performances every day."
More than 1,500 late-night showtimes of the movie have been scheduled for the film's pre-opening on Thursday night (Friday morning), July 17-18. An online survey of more than 3,000 The Dark Knight fans on Fandango.com last week resulted in the following information on the late-night surge:
37% of respondents plan to see the film at least once during one of the late night performances on Thursday night.
38% say that they intend to take off a few hours or the entire day from work on Friday as a result of seeing the movie the night before.
60% of these moviegoers are male.
71% are under the age of 35.
39% plan to see the film in IMAX.
92% expect that the Academy will recognize Heath Ledger's performance as The Joker with a posthumous Oscar nomination next year.
wow. and, wow. (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_dark_knight/)
I'm one of those people, I have tickets for the first show on July 17 but unfortunately, not the IMAX.
I'll end going to see it at the IMAX second time around.
It's insane apparently there are showings around the clock 24/7 for the whole weekend... people are crazy to see this... I read that Warners expect a 'conservative' opening weekend of $90 million, but others are even suggesting a $130-$150 million weekend, which would be a total record for a 3-day. It's really crazy but I love this. The reviews are just ridiculously great. I'm so excited for this film, especially because I remember so many people unsure about Nolan after the first one.
haha. the guy from the New Yorker hated it because it was filmed in Chicago.
thanks to ledger, this movie is filled with enough amazing moments to be labeled great. im really tired so im going to keep this short.
batman begins was the best thing that's ever happened to the franchise. it was exactly the direction that was needed to save the series from schumacher's abortions. the dark knight strays even further from superficial superhero bullshit, taking on a style more comparable to mann or greengrass than anything the series or nolan have delivered in the past. it's a gritty, compelling crime drama. having said that the film does deliver everything the title promises in relation to the batman legacy - it's a dark and relentless narrative on phsychological infirmity.
ledger is phenomenal. his performance is unnerving and brilliantly encompasses the danger and mental instability of the joker that until this point had only been captured on the page. spoiler the shot of the joker tenuously walking away from the hospital [dressed in a nurse's uniform] whilst detonating its destruction may be the most iconic moment any comic book villian has ever been blessed with on the screen.
the last 30 minutes or so are a little jaded, particularly spoiler harvey dent's transformation, which, while merited, i could have done without. regardless, there's a lot to love here. returns is still my favourite batman movie in terms of visual scope but this one is easily the best on an adept level. i might write more tomorrow, i really need to sleep now.
i haven't been caught up in the recent superhero movie mumbojumbo, but this has me pumped.
people are really defensive of this film - look at the bad rotten tomato reviews and see how many comments there are...
i'll contribute something (for once) so i can read everyone's reactions as they come in:
(stolen from imdb)
First Movie Reviews: The Dark Knight
15 July 2008 10:38 AM, PDT
The London Daily Mirror claimed today (Tuesday) that it was publishing the first major newspaper review of the upcoming Batman movie, The Dark Knight. It's a rave. Critic David Edwards remarks that Heath Ledger is "a dead cert" to win the Oscar for his portrayal of The Joker. Edwards says that the late actor "is the brilliant heart of a superhero movie that's like nothing you've ever seen before. ... the finest superhero movie in years." In the U.S., Time Inc.'s Entertainment Weekly is out with a review by Owen Gleiberman that also extols Ledger's performance. "In this, the last performance he completed before his death, Ledger had a maniacal gusto inspired enough to suggest that he might have lived to be as audacious an actor as Marlon Brando, and maybe as great," he writes. Likewise Richard Corliss in Time magazine calls Ledger's performance "magnificent." His Joker, says Corliss, "is simply one of the most twisted and mesmerizing creeps in movie history." In his review for the Associated Press, Christy Lemire writes that The Dark Knight is "an epic that will leave you staggering from the theater, stunned by its scope and complexity." And Peter Travers concludes in Rolling Stone: "The haunting and visionary Dark Knight soars on the wings of untamed imagination."
I think I've probably mentioned before that I could care less for Batman Begins. For whatever the reason, it didn't work for me. Even after reading the screenplay last week, it improved my appreciation for what was attempted, but ultimately I was less than impressed.
Just over an hour ago I got out of The Dark Knight. Holy shit. I want to put serious money down right now that this is going to take Best Picture. It really is quite a staggering film. It's not a comic book movie, it's a sprawling crime drama covering both mafia and cops, that just happens to feature Batman. This is the Godfather Part II of comic book movies. It transcends the genre. Even though I wasn't keen on BB, this film takes and expands the best elements from the first film - I'm talking the saturation of corruption and crime in Gotham.
Of course there's some negative bits, but very few for me. One thing I didn't like was Maggie Gyllenhaal's first scene. Apart from that she was perfectly fine. spoiler I liked the whole transformation of Dent into Harvey Two-Face, but I did think the whole thing with the Gordon family was terribly anti-climatic after everything that had gone before. And I did feel it went on a tad too long, but in this case I really don't feel that's much of a complaint at all. You can't have too much of a good thing, right?
But of course, as all the hype has already determined, this movie belongs to Heath Ledger. I'll be honest, I'm a big fan of the guy. He blew me away in Brokeback Mountain, and if I'm being truthful, is the main reason I gave this film a chance. spoil His entry - aside from the bank robbery we've already all seen - is perhaps one of the most poignant in recent memory. And the whole sequence in the nurses outfit where he explodes the hospital? I think Brockly said it best. I'm not into all the nuances of acting, I only know what I like. But they hype about his performance is completely justified. Ledger does not exist in this film. He becomes The Joker. It is a spectacular performance. He was already a magnificent actor, and would surely have gotten even greater. He will be greatly missed by film lovers everywhere.
I've been reading this thread avidly for a long time. As I said, I didn't have high hopes for this film; I wasn't keen on the first one. Well I fucked up. This is a great movie. Y'all gonna love it, and I look forward to talking with everybody in more depth over the weekend.
My much longer, more spoilerific, morning-after thoughts on the film:
http://web.mac.com/davidtharwood/Site/Blog/Entries/2008/7/17_The_Dark_Knight.html
I'm in the theatre now about to watch this beast. I shall report back tomorrow morning. Goodnight.
i think i'll try and see a matinee tomorrow.
is there anything i need to remember from Batman Begins?
it's been a while since i've seen it and that was once.
...
This was truly amazing. I loved every second of it.
Two things that bothered me is that the expectations were so-so-so high for this, you don't even know what you are expecting anymore. It would have been easy to be disappointed, but I'm not at all. This rocked.
Also, I could not get enough of Heath Ledger. Not only because he was unbelievably amazing as The Joker in every scene, but also because we know he ain't coming back for the next one. I could have watched 2 hours of him talking on screen and still be hooked.
I'm too tired to comment right now but I will say that in Dallas we had it on 12 sold out screens in one multiplex! They only had three prints running through all 12 projectors so I can't even imagine how crazy things were in the booth. I'll report back with thoughts after some sleep.
loved it. lived up to my astronomical expectations. wow. more later.
Meet the Batmen:
http://www.mtv.com/overdrive/?id=1591018&vid=258201
I was just remembering the MINOR-SPOILER 'pencil trick' and started laughing. So good...
I just heard unofficially that the movie made over $18 million in late night screenings. WOW.
The pencil thing was gold. I enjoyed it but it was such a bad idea to see it over night... Staying up was tough and waking up wasn't any easier. I did the same thing for Begins... when will I learn. I can't even say anything constructive about it at this point. I'll have to see it again at the Imax first when I'm more attentive.
Ledger was electric! My God, it's a shame he will not be able to revisit this role. The movie lived up to my hype. If a film like The Fugitive can be nominated for Best Film for being more than an 'action' film, then this should too. There's a long sequence closer to the end that had me riddled with goosepimples from excitement and ended with me sheding a tear. I could not have been any more immersed in something as I was at that point in a film. I was in awe of the pure craft of the filmmaking and performances.
Ledger for Best Supporting/ or Best Actor? Yes definitely.
Best Sceenplay? Maybe. Probably. This is damned good writing.
Best Picture? I don't think so.
I loved it. Spoilertown: Is there anyway they cold make a third? Does Two-Face die at the end of this? I was a bit confused.
Quote from: squints on July 18, 2008, 03:40:07 PM
Ledger for Best Supporting/ or Best Actor? Yes definitely.
Best Sceenplay? Maybe. Probably. This is damned good writing.
Best Picture? I don't think so.
I loved it. Spoilertown: Is there anyway they cold make a third? Does Two-Face die at the end of this? I was a bit confused.
Answering to your spoilers: Yes, a third one is already in the works as far as I know. Two Face seems like dead because they had a funeral for him and everything, but who knows. I think the next one had the riddler as the villain if I recall correctly.
Anything I could say about this film is only echoing most of the superlative filled reviews I've read thus far. They are all correct. Except, no matter how many I read, I still was left staggering from the brilliance of it all. Not only that, but it's devistating. In any context, regardless of Ledger's death looming over this film, it haunts you.
Death and loss, physical, moral, and emotional, are dealt with in such articulate strokes that it still takes me a second to realize I'm discussing a Batman film.
Regardless of how the third one turns out, good or bad, this film exists wholly on it's own. To allude to who would be the villian in part three would have cheapened what a singulat experience this film was.
Hell, it rendered Batman Begins completely irrelevant. Begins always seemed to be well crafted formula - nothing more. It was an orgin story made up entirely of exposition... build up that leaves you bored by the end. By comparison, Begins just seems simple and silly now.
Fucking wonderful.
Quote from: MacGuffin on July 18, 2008, 03:27:28 PM
There's a long sequence closer to the end that had me riddled...
i haven't seen it, but is this a spoiler? :yabbse-wink:
no
:yabbse-wink:
Quote from: john on July 18, 2008, 04:48:51 PM
Anything I could say about this film is only echoing most of the superlative filled reviews I've read thus far. They are all correct. Except, no matter how many I read, I still was left staggering from the brilliance of it all. Not only that, but it's devistating. In any context, regardless of Ledger's death looming over this film, it haunts you.
Death and loss, physical, moral, and emotional, are dealt with in such articulate strokes that it still takes me a second to realize I'm discussing a Batman film.
Regardless of how the third one turns out, good or bad, this film exists wholly on it's own. To allude to who would be the villian in part three would have cheapened what a singulat experience this film was.
Hell, it rendered Batman Begins completely irrelevant. Begins always seemed to be well crafted formula - nothing more. It was an orgin story made up entirely of exposition... build up that leaves you bored by the end. By comparison, Begins just seems simple and silly now.
Fucking wonderful.
Why y'all so serious?
ugh, i suddenly feel so dirty...
I was ordered by some higher ups not to post about this film until it was released. I saw it July 3rd in a special screening. Everything that has already been said, I second it. This is something that will rock the house on my HD Widescreen TV when it comes out on DVD and Blu-ray 3 days after my birthday.
Amazing! Amazing! Amazing!
The domestic box office went into overdrive on Friday as Warner Bros.' Batman sequel "The Dark Night" stood ready to deliver the best opening day gross ever, taking in an estimated $60 million to $63 million in ticket sales from a record 4,366 theaters.
"Dark Knight," toplining Christian Bale and directed by Christopher Nolan, could nab the highest opening ever for a non-holiday weekend if business stays as strong as expected on Saturday and Sunday. Previous record-holdover for both opening day and best opening for a non-holiday weekend is "Spider-Man 3." "Spider-Man 3" made $59.8 million on its opening Friday, and $151.1 million for the weekend.
The critically acclaimed "Dark Knight" is Nolan's follow-up to "Batman Begins," which grossed $15 million on its opening day in June 2006, and $48.7 million for the weekend.
"Dark Knight's" Friday haul includes an estimated $18.5 million in midnight shows, beating the previous midnight record set by Fox's "Star Wars, Episode III: The Revenge of the Sith" which grossed $16.9 million from 3,663 venues.
Source: Variety
Box Office Mojo is estimating 66.4 mill for friday, that alone almost outgrosses Begins' 72mill five-day opening, wow, bye bye spidey.
So glad that for once a great film is doing spectacular.
I haven't seen it yet :yabbse-sad:
I felt close to tears the entire time I was watching this because Heath Ledger was so incredible, and that is all we are ever going to see. They cannot ever do another Joker ever again; Ledger has taken it to quite another level. Rips the bandage right off my heart.
Quote from: OrHowILearnedTo on July 18, 2008, 07:03:03 PM
Why y'all so serious?
ugh, i suddenly feel so dirty...
Don't want to come off as too serious... but it would be dismissive to disregard what I felt following this film. That said, it was tremendously fun... though, to just say that would be equally dismissive.
Don't feel dirty. You enjoy the film exactly how you want, and I'll do the same. Afterwards, we'll both be right.
It's probably the most immersive, awed experience I've felt watching a Batman film theatrically since I was a little one watching Burton's interpretation. And, just like Burton's, I think it reinvented the entire legacy - making an audience appreciate it in a way, until now, wholly unseen.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashfilm.com%2Fwp%2Fwp-content%2Fimages%2Fimdbtoptdk1-440x252.jpg&hash=04f32873bc4675447363c2c68af9952575645a91)
Source: /film
On Thursday we told you that 4,591 Internet Movie Database users had rated The Dark Knight a 9.7 out of 10 (or a 9.0 out of 10 from regular IMDb voters), good enough for the #4 spot on the top 250 movies of all time life. We expected the film to slide down a few slots as a larger sample of votes came in. We were wrong.
It's now Saturday night, and with 19,000 more votes counted, the film has propelled into the coveted #1 spot! Of course, The Dark Knight is expected to slide down the list as more and more votes are added to the average, but it's worth noting this almost unprecedented accomplishment.
The top spot has been held by The Godfather since sometime in the late 1990's (this late 1996 capture of the chart from the early days of IMDb shows Star Wars in the top slot). As far as I can tell, no film has unseated The Godfather from the top spot in the last decade. The last film to get even close was The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King, which got a high as the #2 in 2004. Return of the King currently sits comfortably at #14.
I LOVE THIS FILM.
I grew up with the Tim Burton Batman films. My dad took me to see Batman in the theatre on opening night and I returned to see it 4 more times in the theatre. When the film came out on video, we had pre-ordered a copy (even though it was available in every drugstore) and I watched it so many times I had the opening credits memorized. I could recite the names before they appeared onscreen, and that's not even considering the actual dialogue. I have seen the film, and Returns many times since and they remain some of my favorite films of all time. Despite even my dad's nitpicking of them, they remain, to me, perfect. So to say I had expectations for Batman Begins is an understatement. After following news of potential restarts to the series for years, by the time the film was released I was rabid with anticipation. I wanted to believe that this film could make me feel the way that the original Batman had in 1989.
But when I finally saw Batman Begins I left the theatre disappointed because the movie had failed to live up to my expectations. While I liked the film a lot, it had not been the movie I had built in my mind from endlessly replaying the trailer and couldn't come close to the feeling I got from the Burton films. Rewatching the film recently I find even more I could nitpick about it. But with the final scene of that film being my favorite moment, I wanted to believe The Dark Knight could deliver on that promise. But feeling my excitement growing dangerously out of control as the reviews started to pour in I began to worry that this too could not possibly live up to what I wanted it to be. I tried to keep my excitement in check, telling myself if I could just watch it the first time without finding anything to nitpick, if it could make me forget for 2 1/2 hours that anything had preceded it, then I would be happy.
And so it came. Midnight on Thursday at my favorite screen in the city (Theatre 1 at Lincoln Square), with about 15 friends I saw the film. And somehow, impossibly it lived up to my expectations. For 2 1/2 hours I never thought about the length, I never groaned at a line, I never thought about how the film could have been because the film I was watching was so engrossing. I saw the film a 2nd time today and it made me appreciate how great the audience was at Midnight and how much that helps the viewing experience. I feel bad for anyone who see's the film for the first time with a group of people who doesn't appreciate how good what they are seeing is.
SPOILERS PROBABLY
The last 2 minutes of this film are perfect. They're the absolute antithesis of the ending of Begins and I get chills just replaying the scene in my mind. I actually teared up watching it for the 2nd time today.
I love every actor in this film. Everybody plays their part perfectly. Everybody has just enough to do. They can't recast Ledger. He's left big shoes to fill for the next actor in my lifetime who has to try. I love the shit out of Gary Oldman in this movie. I believe him as that character and it still bugs me out to think about his real voice not sounding anything like Gordon's. Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine are both great at adding moments of levity and responsibility in their parts.
The script is brilliant. The movie does such an amazing job creating REAL SUSPENSE. I realized most of the time when you watch a movie you're going through the motions as an audience member. Iron Man is blowing shit up, it's fun, you know he's going to save Gweneth Paltrow, but here the film creates an atmosphere where outside of Batman dying you feel like ANYTHING COULD HAPPEN. Every single sequence where The Joker threatened someone I was on the edge of my seat because you really don't know who might die. The film did such a good job convincing me that anything could happen that I was SURE the boats were going to blow up. (1. I thought that the remotes were going to blow up their own boat and that would've been Jokers twist or that either remote blew up both boats instead of just the other one. 2. Subliminally I think at the final moment I thought it was still going to happen because Joker says "here we GO" which in all the trailers is followed by an EXPLOSION. This was no accident. Nolan is a genius.) In Spider-Man he goes to save a traincar of people and you're thinking "this is where Spider-Man saves all these people" not like "those people are going to fucking DIE I'm SURE of it!" and The Dark Knight made me believe it.
The score makes this film. The sounds effects (screeeeeech, TONE) and silence do just as much to create a mood as the music.
The marketing is amazing. I watched every trailer for this film and it still managed to hold so much back. The scene with the batpod and Joker in the trailers I had always thought would be the final showdown. The fact that this occurs midway through was great because then you werent sitting there going "I know that scene is coming up cause I saw it in the trailers". The entire final hour of the film (outside of breaking the batsignal?) was not in ANY trailer or promotional material. The fact that Two-Face a MAJOR VILLAIN has not been spoiled by T-shirts, action figures, posters, trailers, etc. is INCREDIBLE. How the fuck did Nolan get away with this! How did he convince the studio NOT to sell more shit, it boggles my mind.
The worst part about this film is knowing that there is NO WAY the inevitable third film will be as good as this. In the rare instances where the 2nd film surpasses the original (or at least lives up to) they always screw up the third one. Probably the best threequel I can think of is Jedi which has some great stuff (but it also has Ewoks). More often 3's are Batman Forever, Terminator 3, Spider-Man 3, The Godfather 3. So even if they can get Nolan to return, he is going to have a hell of a time trying to top himself. If he doesn't return I think it will be because he realizes he already created his masterpiece and exhausted himself thematically and that none of Batman's remaining villains can come close to The Joker and the performance that Ledger gave. So the most disappointing thing is just knowing this is the best Batman film we will see in our lives.
More later. Can't wait to hear why GT doesn't like it. I will fight you. :)
Quote from: modage on July 19, 2008, 09:13:49 PM
More later. Can't wait to hear why GT doesn't like it. I will fight you. :)
Haha. You're right, I don't. Thought I would love it but it was pretty terrible. My review is coming shortly.
damn, this was not very good. how disappointing.
I'm pretty sure anyone who hated this movie fails at life.
Yeah, and furthermore anyone who hates walle doesn't have a soul.....j/k.....well, half joking.
yeah anyone who loved you don't mess with the zohan is too jew.
'Dark Knight' sets weekend record with $155.34M
LOS ANGELES (AP) Batman has sent Spidey packing as king of Hollywood's box office superheroes.
"The Dark Knight" took in a record $155.34 million in its first weekend, said Dan Fellman, head of distribution for Warner Bros., which released the "Batman Begins" sequel.
That topped Hollywood's previous best of $151.1 million, set by "Spider-Man 3" in May 2007.
"We knew it would be big, but we never expected to dominate the marketplace like we did," Fellman said. The movie should shoot past the $200 million mark by the end of the week, he said.
Factoring in higher admission prices, however, "Spider-Man 3" may have sold slightly more tickets than "The Dark Knight."
At 2007's average price of $6.88, "Spider-Man 3" sold 21.96 million tickets over opening weekend. Box office tracker Media By Numbers estimates today's average movie prices at $7.08, which means "The Dark Knight" would have sold 21.94 million tickets.
The movie's release was preceded by months of buzz and speculation over the performance of the late Heath Ledger as the Joker, Batman's nemesis. Ledger, who died in January from an accidental prescription-drug overdose, played the Joker as a demonic presence, his performance prompting predictions that the role might earn him a posthumous Academy Award nomination.
"The Dark Knight," which cost $185 million to make, also broke the "Spider-Man 3" record for best debut in IMAX large-screen theaters with $6.2 million. "Spider-Man 3" opened with $4.7 million in IMAX cinemas.
On opening day Friday, "The Dark Knight" also took in more money than previously counted, Fellman said. The film pulled in a record $67.85 million, up nearly $1.5 million from the studio's estimates a day earlier.
The previous opening-day record also had been held by "Spider-Man 3" with $59.8 million.
Quote from: modage on July 19, 2008, 09:13:49 PM
The score makes this film. The sounds effects (screeeeeech, TONE) and silence do just as much to create a mood as the music.
very true.
loved it too. could've done w/out Batman talking so much and Maggie Gyll though. i'm convinced now that Heath would've been better than Brando.
i'm also now convinced Nolan won't do a third. he's too smart to fall into traps and is ready to continue his progressing brilliance in new genres.
Anyone who hated this movie prays at the alter of Schumacher.
Quote from: MacGuffin on July 20, 2008, 02:38:08 PM
Anyone who hated this movie prays at the alter of Schumacher.
very true.
Batman Forever is on cable right now. opening dialogue..
Alfred: Can I persuade you to take a sandwich, sir?
Batman: I'll get drive-thru.
haha
(shrug)
I liked it okay.
I don't think it was bad at all. I admire a lot of what it aspired to do, some of which it did and some of which it didn't (for me). So I guess hit-and-miss is what I'd say.
I still enjoyed myself and would even like to see it in IMAX in a few weeks maybe.
Quote from: Pozer on July 20, 2008, 02:59:53 PM
Batman Forever is on cable right now. opening dialogue..
Alfred: Can I persuade you to take a sandwich, sir?
Batman: I'll get drive-thru.
haha
hah. yeh batman and robin's opening dialogue was way wittier..
Robin: I want a car, chicks dig the car.
Batman: This is why Superman works alone.
http://www.thehousenextdooronline.com/2008/07/trickster-heaven-two-faced-hell-dark.html
blows things out of proportion but offers an interesting perspective, despite it being steeped in smug pretentiousness. (he's a featured contributor on everyone's favorite online pop culture elitist website slant magazine)
so like everyone else, i loved this movie. SPOILERS (sort of) HEREIN: the 180 on the motorcycle might be the single most awesome moment in the history of cinema/mankind, one that turns everyone in the audience into a bro for at least three seconds. chris nolan's post 9/11 evocations might be lacking in thematic clarity--i certainly didn't read it as a bush administration apologia--but on an emotional level i found it be incredibly poignant. this is probably the most elegiac summer blockbuster ever made and it's exciting to see a film that, in my opinion, accomplishes greatness both as entertainment and art be number one at the box office to the degree that it is.
i hope gary oldman doesn't go completely unappreciated. he deserves individual recognition for being especially great instead of being obscured to anonymity ("great performances across the board"), although that isn't so bad given how strong the ensemble is in this film. eric roberts?! i have to say maggie ghyllenhaal isn't quite the step up that she was supposed to be--my feeling, as it was in the first film, is that rachel is a weak character and the actresses can't be held accountable for how flat she is in the films. what more is there to say about ledger, except that if i see a better performance this year, i will eat my own butt.
Quote from: matt35mm on July 20, 2008, 07:17:32 PM
(shrug)
I liked it okay.
I don't think it was bad at all. I admire a lot of what it aspired to do, some of which it did and some of which it didn't (for me). So I guess hit-and-miss is what I'd say.
i feel about the same.
except for the hospital/exit scene (which will probably be the greatest scenes/sequence of the year), nothing really stands out for me.
i worship not the schumacher, but the burton as far as batman goes.
i don't think i'm too crazy about Bale's Batman voice either.
How the fuck did this get a PG-13? It's an R if I've ever seen one.
This is the only movie so far this year I've seen twice. Really outstanding.
They can't top this, probably, but if Nolan makes a go at it, I'd love to see him actually take more cues from The Dark Knight Returns (which they could actually use as a title, come to think of it). Set it five or so years after this one. Batman's disappeared, no one's seen him since the whole Joker / Two Face thing. I don't know what would be a good enough threat to bring him out of retirement, but if they could find a hook, it'd be pretty cool. Get the whole horse riding through Gotham climax.
Quote from: bigideas on July 20, 2008, 10:18:04 PM
i don't think i'm too crazy about Bale's Batman voice either.
Oh my god, thank you. Now I don't have to say that in my review. When Bale talks in Batman voice he is either talking ridiculously gruff or speaking like he is on the toilet and can't get that big piece of shit out. It's ridiculously embarassing seeing him always trying to sound that tough/constipated.
When Keaton was Batman he just added a darker tone to his voice. He spoke with calm and confidence and never tried to intimdiate with his voice. The suit and look already did it. It also made me feeling like Keaton was acting within the suit when Bale is just badly posturing.
I had the same problems with Bale's Batman voice when I initially saw Begins, as well.
It seemed incredulous, though, that someone like Bale - who has always been a tremendously gifted, and astute, actor when it comes to inflection and intonation - could fuck up something so seemingly simple. Shit, my girlfriend didn't even know Bale was English until the MTV Movie Awards.
It makes sense to me, though, that it's not Bale's mistake - that it's intentional. Wayne's Batman IS posturing. He's still figuring out his persona, and it's a bit clumsy.
I haven't bothered listening to any commentary tracks, or reading any interviews, to see if there's any truth to this. There might not be. But it seems like he's getting better at it. "He", being Bruce Wayne, rather than Christian Bale. More comfortable inhabiting the persona of Batman.
In Bale's defense, that voice is at least 50 % synthesizer. It'd be interesting to see some scenes of him as Batman with the original on-set audio.
Well I got the voice thing with Batman Begins. I think it worked better in that movie because he was brief in dialogue, and the shots were quick (making him elusive). Here, there were a couple of moments where it lingered on him while he was talking and I had a difficult time taking it as seriously as it was taking itself. He had to take deep breaths between sentences and everything.
I had several problems with the editing in this movie, actually. It felt sloppy to me. I wish the shots of the Joker lingered longer (I feel like I didn't even get the chance to be chilled by the Joker), and there were many moments that were just plain confusing to me, simply due to the editing. So many scenes were shot with just a steadicam swirling around two people as they're talking in order to infuse the scene with a bunch of energy (which is pretty standard and I hoped that this film would be a little more imaginative). I would disagree with those who say that this film is very well crafted. I think the film would have played better at 3 hours for that screenplay, or could have had a shorter screenplay.
There were also many scenes where, for example, (SPOILER) After the Joker crashes the party with all of Gotham's elite, and Batman and Rachel fall down and hit the car, they banter a bit and then it cuts to next day. It just seemed odd to me not to show the Joker doing anything with that roomful of people afterwards, just slipping out quietly, and that we don't see Batman at least try to look for Joker. There's something so quick and on to the next thing and on to the next thing about this movie. I had an overwhelming sense of stuff happening and an underwhelming sense of Bruce Wayne (who?) in all of this. He was sad about Rachel for about 3 minutes. (END SPOILER)
So my favorite parts were when the movie lingered on certain moments. The hospital explosion is a good example of that, and I also very much like the shot of Joker with his head out of the window of the cop car (though I wish even that shot lingered for longer). I do like very much what modage pointed out in saying that especially the second half was not very predictable, and the Joker did feel like a real threat. I kind of wish, though, that he had even less of a plan that he did have. I would have been interested in how complete randomness and chaos would have messed with Batman, but the Joker was indeed relatively chaotic and unpredictable.
The filmmakers have definitely convinced me that the world of Batman and Gotham is indeed a great way to illustrate these very interesting ideas in a powerful way--but I felt like the ideas could have been better developed and illustrated. Here, I felt like all the ingredients were there, but the screenplay and some of the filmmaking decisions muddled many of the ideas, or in some cases, over-simplified them (usually in the form of a simple duality).
I DID enjoy myself, though. I went into the theater fully prepared to gush, and instead of gushing I simply enjoyed myself, was engaged, liked some things and didn't like some things... so I'm a little disappointed, and probably being too hard on it (though I think the movie can take it, what with the heaps of praise it's mostly getting), but I'm glad I saw it and I had a good time.
inspired by an imdb dark knight thread entitled "LUCAS and SPIELBERG: YOU LOSE!"
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi139.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fq293%2Fnoveltyhat%2Foscz1.jpg&hash=e0c77a210a1efe6de5dbaaeb6dcb8a41188c59fd)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi139.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fq293%2Fnoveltyhat%2Foscz2.jpg&hash=d57922479deb0e027ae52b487cc1955e91fee1fa)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi139.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fq293%2Fnoveltyhat%2Foscz3.jpg&hash=dbffc237997c527944b4f4c73f15aa62854b5049)
i love this movie deeply despite its obvious flaws. probably more later.
Quote from: Ghostboy on July 20, 2008, 11:33:50 PM
In Bale's defense, that voice is at least 50 % synthesizer. It'd be interesting to see some scenes of him as Batman with the original on-set audio.
really?
i don't know why they'd even want to do that.
I thought this was a monstrous improvement over Nolan's first Batman film, which I found quite boring. My only bone to pick is also the Christian Bale Batman "voice". What the fuck? It bordered on the ridiculous and amateurish. Every time Batman spoke it just took me right out of the movie, it was just so silly and unbelievable. It's amazing to me that with all the money, thought, effort and planning that went into such an epic film, that nobody at any point down the line said, "Uh, Mr. Nolan, no one can understand what the hell Batman is saying because it sounds like he's been gargling with shredded glass and smoking 12 packs of menthols a day." At first I thought, oh, OK, Nolan is trying very hard to make all of this believable and is striving for a high level of realism, so the thinking is that in order to hide his identity Wayne puts on this gargoyle voice whenever he's Batman. But he uses the voice with people who already know he's Batman! He's hanging out with Morgan Freeman, not in the suit, and he's talking like normal Christian Bale, and then he goes over and suits up and suddenly it's dragon voice... It was just so silly in a movie that was overall very serious, almost even portentous. Anyway, other than that, I enjoyed it immensely, despite being confused by a few plot points that felt rushed.
yeah. and his voice was dumb too...
The Dark Knight's Final Tally? $158.4 Million!
Source: The Hollywood Reporter, Variety
On Sunday, Warner Bros. Pictures estimated that The Dark Knight had earned $155.3 million its opening weekend. Turns out, that was low! The final figures show that Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins follow-up took in a record-breaking $158.4 million over the Friday-to-Sunday frame, easily beating the $151.1 million opening of Spider-Man 3 in May 2007.
One of the big reasons for the lower estimate was that the studio expected the movie to do about $39.4 million on Sunday but in actuality it received about $43 million, again beating Spider-Man 3's previous record of $39.9 million for the day.
The film earned a record-breaking $67.8 million on Friday alone. Of that, $18.5 million came from midnight shows, besting the previous midnight record set by Fox's 2005 Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, which grossed $16.9 million from 3,663 theaters.
It also set the record for an IMAX opener, earning $6.2 million from 94 IMAX theaters.
The studio estimates that The Dark Knight, which opened in a record 4,366 theaters, could gross as much as $220 million in its first week. That's more than the entire domestic gross of Nolan's Batman Begins, which earned $205 million domestically and $166 million overseas.
The big opening allowed the box office to take in a record $250 million in ticket sales total. The previous weekend record was $218.4 million, set in July 2007 when Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest opened to $135.6 million.
(from imdb)
Knight Director May Shoot Next Film In IMAX
21 July 2008 10:30 AM, PDT
Director Christopher Nolan, who shot the action sequences in The Dark Knight using gigantic IMAX cameras, says that he "would be very interested in shooting a whole film in IMAX" since it would allow him to provide a theatrical movie that would "be distinct from the home theater experience." In an interview with the Collider website, Nolan said that the principal problem is the noise produced by the IMAX camera's mechanism, which apparently cannot be adequately contained by the usual soundproof "blimp" used for most studio cameras. "It's very, very hard to see how you do dialogue scenes," he said. "And the lenses are so wide, you're shooting this conversation, the cameras go 18 inches from your nose, basically, and it sounds like one of those small portable generators -- that's about the level of volume of it. So to just speak over that and to act as if that's not there is very tough."
spoilers, i guess.
the only things worse than his voice were the convulated, wtf cell phone/sonar subplot which made no sense and the transformation of dent into two-face in the span of like 20 minutes. also, i thought the makeup/effects for two face were terrible.
ledger was really great, but it felt like he was in a whole different movie. like he was trying really hard and taking the role really seriously, but no one else was doing the same. i thought eckhard was terrible and bale, freeman and caine had pretty much nothing to do.
Quote from: abuck1220 on July 21, 2008, 08:07:24 PM
spoilers, i guess.
the only things worse than his voice were the convulated, ... and the transformation of dent into two-face in the span of like 20 minutes. also, i thought the makeup/effects for two face were terrible.
i didn't like the voice either. it's been a pretty common complaint since begins. two-face's makeup was pure cheesy wonderment, i thought it was great. the campiness also helped ease the implausibility of his transformation, which was probably the biggest problem i had with the film too.
Quote from: brockly on July 21, 2008, 08:48:56 PM
Quote from: abuck1220 on July 21, 2008, 08:07:24 PM
spoilers, i guess.
the only things worse than his voice were the convulated, ... and the transformation of dent into two-face in the span of like 20 minutes. also, i thought the makeup/effects for two face were terrible.
i didn't like the voice either. it's been a pretty common complaint since begins. two-face's makeup was pure cheesy wonderment, i thought it was great. the campiness also helped ease the implausibility of his transformation, which was probably the biggest problem i had with the film too.
but the campiness of two face just didn't jive with the super dark joker. like i said, it was like ledger was in a completely different movie than the rest of the characters.
and the asian guy? that whole subplot was stupid and confusing.
Quote from: abuck1220 on July 21, 2008, 08:56:01 PMbut the campiness of two face just didn't jive with the super dark joker.
but there was nothing campy about two face outside of his appearance. i actually think the character jived brilliantly given the joker's satiric mien. as ive already said i could have done without the character altogether in this film but regardless i loved the way they approached him.
i think the voice is to show that Batman himself still doesn't know his identity very well, and he is just trying so that people won't recognize him and also think he is tough. It's not very good but I think they left it maybe because they want to show that he still did not figure everything out in terms of his Batman alter ego. In the first one he was trying too hard, and he kinda left it the same, but its the same reason why he is very clumsy sometimes. It has flaws in that aspect cause there are scenes like at the beginning when he is trying to stop the car and cuts himself and then crashes into a column, but then he is not clumsy when jumping off a 120-story rooftop in China or doing a 180 with the bike.
I also did not like the make up / effects of two face. Of course I wasn't expecting a Halloween Tommy Lee Jones two-face, but that was just creepy in a bad way and not very good.
i loved it.
semi-spoiler, kind of.
this movie is Lisa the Iconoclast. you know what i mean.
i'mmmm sleep deprived. good night.
this was great. not the masterpiece i thought it would be, but still great.
spoilers
my biggest problem with it was the length. it didn't need to be this long. the last half hour is what really changed my opinion of the film. i was so sucked into the joker as the villain of the film, and then they just brushed him aside and set-up two-face as a villain waaaaay too quick. should have saved him for the next film. didn't buy the fact that at one moment he's gothams next hope for cleaning up the city, and the next he's killing innocent people left and right with no remorse what-so-ever. his last scene in the film should have been the scene in the hospital with the joker. they shouldn't have even showed the left side of his face in this one. i was pissed when they did.
and we didn't get enough resolution with the joker. i'd of loved it if the film ended with a shot of him in a padded cell. looking happy.
i also agree about batmans voice. uuuggghhhh! way too over the top.... but this is funny: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2yv8aT0UFc
i apologize for talking very briefly about the movie in question and wasting everybody's time but this is what i felt after seeing it.
first of all, i think this movie was tailormade for people like modage and me, who've been into batman for as long as they can remember and never worried about the nerdiness of it all , as some cynics disrespectfuly refer to a harmless admiration, a devotion even, to a work of fiction. i hope the bitching about superheroes being taken seriously, or superheroes stories that take themselves seriously, goes away. that's as unfair as the idiot who's always there to remind us that a game is just a game, or movies are just movies, or a book is just a book, and a long et cetera. it's stuff nobody wants to hear.
i'm angry, because i know there's some people out there who were salivating for the moment this movie ended in order to imediately talk bad about it. why bother seeing it. and they ruin the experience a little. it's not something that happens just for this movie. it's an unhealthy obsession with wanting everything to be obscure and cryptic. i've had it with this. this movie is a monster, it is original and daring. it costed 100 million dollars and millions of people went to see it this weekend and many will see it on the weeks to come. i hope everyone in the world sees this, not because i thinks its message is so important that it will forever transform the corrupted values of mankind and people will be enlightened. it is because there's no point of enjoying this movie if you don't have somebody to share the excitement with.
as i advance writing this, the more ideas come about the point i want to make, but i'll stop to be polite and say this: this movie works for me as a bastion against nocive snobism that's not helping a part of the cultural sphere in which we move, and then transforms into uglier stuff, like perverse social interaction.
cron, you are the fucking man.
This was uber fantastic and I
need to ask demand to all of you the following:
Do yourself a favor and watch this on IMAX asap! Even if you need to drive for an hour to see it or even more, you have to see this on IMAX.
Heath was simply amazing, what else is to say about his performance than that he set the bar too high so it's almost impossible for anyone else to step into his shoes.
Quote from: Fernando on July 08, 2008, 04:54:21 PM
I wonder if GT liked it, for the ppl that didn't I really feel bad for ya.
seeing the gasoline travel vertically during that scene made me consider a visual echo from teddy's death scene in memento
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg503.imageshack.us%2Fimg503%2F9073%2Ffaceiu5.jpg&hash=057b21299f522dc1cd71dad21ceb6ab5efb8dde4)
Quote from: jtm on July 22, 2008, 01:18:18 AM
spoilers
i was so sucked into the joker as the villain of the film, and then they just brushed him aside...
and we didn't get enough resolution with the joker. i'd of loved it if the film ended with a shot of him in a padded cell. looking happy.
my 2nd viewing i thought about this too about 2/3rds of the way through. i thought: wouldn't it be great if there was a shot of Joker in Arkham during the final minutes, but when that point in the film came I realized it wouldn't have fit. the film was about the fall of Harvey Dent more than it was about the Joker's master plan.
Hey, all this talk about batman this and batman that, I don't think Batman is what this world needs you know? I think we need a different kind of superhero...like...Dog Woman.
uh, but what kind of superhero is Dog Woman?
"what kind"? I'll tell you what kind!
A bitchilante, that's what kind!
end of thread.
you guys staged that!
I think pete was dreaming about a dog woman, then came up with the term 'bitchilante', and then figured out a way to throw it in here... a little sad but at least he is trying... give him a break!!!
Can we start speculating as to which villain will be in the third? I'd say their best bet would be Catwoman. The Riddler is too similar to the joker. Mr. Freeze wouldn't work. Poison Ivy is lame. I say Catwoman.
or dog woman?
Quote from: squints on July 22, 2008, 04:41:49 PM
Can we start speculating as to which villain will be in the third? I'd say their best bet would be Catwoman. The Riddler is too similar to the joker. Mr. Freeze wouldn't work. Poison Ivy is lame. I say Catwoman.
or dog woman?
SPOILERSWord on the street is that Harvey might not be death (well its one theory), because while we see him laying down there, he easily could only be unconscious, and yes there was a funeral but Gordon also staged his death, so maybe Gordon arranged that so they try to 'cure' Harvey at some mad house.
Spoiltown:
I assumed Dent wasn't dead. I'm thinking Catwoman because Rachael's gone and Wayne needs a new love in his life. A doomed love full of treachery and deceit! But I guess Batman Returns already kind of covered this.
Spoilers
Batman is a childhood treasure to me. He's the only super hero I ever truly bought into and followed with the utmost interest as I got older. Everything started with Burton's Batman and continued on with Batman: The Animated Series. I still watch those cartoons and also the Burton original. When I came to watch Batman Begins I was suspicious about a lot of the technical details, but I still enjoyed the film on a basic level because it was a rendering of Batman that did remind me of why I loved the character. The film rationalized a lot of technical details, but was wonderfully inventive with adding the Raz Ah Gaul plotline to describe his beginnings, among other things.
The sadness for me is that The Dark Knight is neither very good technically nor does it even remind me of my basic intrinsic interest in the character of Batman. Nolan in his reimagination has drained the character of all his essential qualities. He has made Batman and the series to be dramatic foil for something more, but in his idea to transcend the super hero genre I believe he has made a film that isn't even technically a Batman film.
My problems begin with something everybody is complimenting. People love that the tone and structure of the film has more to do with a crime drama than it does a super hero film. The first thing I noticed about the film was that Nolan wanted to take on a complicated plot with detailed analysis of the mob scene in Gotham City. The first half of the film is an exploration into how the city is taking on new methods to combat the mafia. The film could be argued as inducting itself into social analysis because it does look at multiple levels of crime and bureacy within the city.
I believe the film is interested in all these details, but none of the interest is really about a social analysis of a fictional city. The main interest of mafia focus is to show a system of order within the criminal world so the entrance of the Joker becomes that more embrasive because he totally disregards the rules, but the film just dedicates too much time and energy to what should have been just a story in the background or a subplot at best. The major problem is that the first half of the film is about something that is mainly meant to get the audience to understand that the Joker is a threat to order on all levels of life. A very simple message to the audience that could have been illustrated much easier and in a much simpler way. It really had nothing to do with social interest. That's absurd.
The tone reminded of Heat in that it was a straight laced story of professional killers and heroes acting professional, but as much that talk intrigues the audiences, it has no dramatic core or deeper meaning to it. The first half of the Dark Knight is much more interesting because of the plot ideas it has to imagine Batman in China going after a businessman in James Bond fashion. The fact that the film was able to do that without great question of the storyline is the most successful thing about it, but that has nothing to do with who Batman is or what he is about. It has everything to do with the wheels of a great plot idea turning. Heat is a fascinating movie, but it is a movie of an operatic movie style meant to allure the audience instead of getting them to sympathize with deeper moral questions.
The main problem in the film has to do with Batman. Once the film begins we are already knee deep in the storyline described above. Batman is the man who moves his way through out the puzzle to catch the mobsters and does so with cool confidence. We're interested because when we question his intelligence we see he was already a step ahead, but Batman is first served up to us as just a know it all.
The transition to his darker and more personal side becomes ridiculous. His character is frustrated with Joker's tactics because it leaves him immobile and unsure about how to react so we begin to notice Batman randomly walking into public situations and beating everyone up. When he does this we don't see him dealing with his problem to need to control everything, but as him just being Batman and intimidating the bad guys. The tone of these attacks replicate the cool crime drama tone only. It is further down the story that characters like Alfred and Lucious Fox began to tell Batman and the audience of what his problem really is. Lucious Fox even reveals things Batman has done to signify his deep character conflicts that the audience had no chance to be aware of. Their words are meant to be the dramatic ingrediants for us when the film should have made us aware of Batman's control issues beforehand. It should have laced the actions and happenings of Batman with their dramatic significance before they happened.
Then there is the question of his presence and tone. In Burton's original Batman did little actual fighting. Numerous scenes in the movie were about his presence and the fear he put into characters. The fights after saving Vicky Vale involve him doing stuff to bad guys, but it was minimal. The only other major fights were at the end on the roof top with the Joker's main men. The film was awesome to strike a tone with him that he was a character in the shadows and represented an idea. Batman Begins had the storyline to say he was an idea to crime figures, but Dark Knight shows him as just a cool operator of punishing people. When he enters an impossible situation, he does it with little suave and enters just from dark corners. The meat of the scenes then transition into him engaging in complicated martial arts and beating up everyone. I thought Batman Begins had a little too much of this because it smacks of Jason Bourne envy, but I felt the movie kept it to a decent minimum. I felt like Dark Knight abandonded the original tone of Batman entirely and purely focused on his fighting capabilities. In two seconds flat he would enter an impossible situation and spend three minutes beating up everyone. Little tone of Batman with how much the focus was on his physical attributes.
People may believe it showed this because Batman was in doubt about himself, but the tone of most of the fights match up with the tone of first half of the film: that Batman and Bruce Wayne are second guessed by others but rise to show they are smarter than everyone else. To show Batman was in true doubt or still learning would show him eventually lose in some of these impossible fighting situations, but he never does. His character has as much intricacy as an old Steven Segal character. Segal's characters would beat everyone up and he was meant to be portrayed as someone filled with emotional problems, but it always showed it with him just randomly beating up people only. The bulk of Batman's characterization is through this way as well. Sure, other characters and plot lines also come up to try to define his problems, but they come up much later in the film. Wayne's relationship with Rachel is only given a few scenes while Fox and Alfred spell out way too much about Wayne's problems. If you want to measure up the first half of the film for emotional inspection than a lot of it just resembles a bad Segeal movie.
Then there is the Joker. His character is by far the most interesting part of the film, but Nolan adds an old bad technique in which to portray him. Nolan always has his appearances coinside with elaborate criminal plots. It reminds me of Memento when the characterization of the characters were wrapped in an elaborate plot. Burton's original had Joker as a better presence. He was able to dominate more scenes and the audience was able to make sense of who he was from his actions. In Nolan's version we make sense of him from his complicated crime ideas. There are few times when Nolan goes to the character to just see him interact. Nolan realizes he needs to give the Joker some more meat so he allows him to make up lines about a troubled childhood, but the Joker doesn't need such an explanation. He just needs more time. The audience can believe some characters are just psychotic. I wish the film would have granted the Joker more physical time to interact with other characters and show how he was to develop himself. Instead we got a lot of talk about who he is from other characters and a lot of unnecessary explanation about his childhood. Nolan wanted to represent the Joker as a force, but explaining him that way didn't help.
Then there is Heath Ledger's performance. The good is that Ledger was able to imagine the Joker to be this way. I couldn't have pictured such a Joker but Ledger does it and pushes it to the extreme that was necessary. I just don't believe the creation was that great because Ledger focuses a lot of his role on make uo, vocal tone and physical gestures. It seems like he created a character that will be very easy for anyone else to mimic or copy. At least with Nicholson's performance you have Nicholson using a lot of his personality to will the character. No one else could do the role the way he did it. There is good in keeping a lot of your essential personality part of a role because it allows you to staple that role. It allows you to use essentials as an actor no one else can copy. All actors know how to mimic physical gestures and can do voice copies so the sad note about Ledger's performance is that had so little to do with Ledger himself. He truly concealed himself but that meant making a role I believe was a little too simplistic.
Then there is Harvey Dent and how he becomes Two Face. It's sad that a major character like this is only served up to come into existence and then immediately die. Some believe his character will live on, but I can't assume that will happen. What Two Face rising to and immediately dying means that the film was too casual and happy with the dramatic endings. In one scene you have Rachel die in a tragic fashion. That scene had the weight and meat to end a film. She was a major character and her death should have begun a new chapter for everyone involved. It did for Two Face but his character was immediately wiped out. That's ridiculous. You don't kill off a character of such importance so quickly especially when he was created out of one of the most important dramatic sequences for the entire movie. The film tries to add on meaning to his death by explaining how Batman became the Dark Knight from it, but that's rubbish. The final 20 minutes of the film had more dramatic happenings and changes than the rest of the whole film. The piling on of dramatic moments just reminded me of Spiderman 3. It tried to write off answers for every character when it could have let one situation define the movie and just explore the new subjects more in the next film, but everything had to be answered, whether it needed to or not. The film had too many endings to be legitimate.
People applaud Nolan for doing Batman anew, but I believe in the process he lost of a lot essential qualities about Batman that I loved. I believe this film was more a crime drama than it was a Batman film. One critic said it was a crime drama that just happened to have Batman in it. I concur.
Quote from: pete on July 22, 2008, 03:48:51 PM
Hey, all this talk about batman this and batman that, I don't think Batman is what this world needs you know? I think we need a different kind of superhero...like...Dog Woman.
You're a good guy... you Pete, you're a good guy.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 22, 2008, 06:24:07 PM
Spoilers
Batman is a childhood treasure to me. He's the only super hero I ever truly bought into and followed with the utmost interest as I got older. Everything started with Burton's Batman and continued on with Batman: The Animated Series. I still watch those cartoons and also the Burton original. When I came to watch Batman Begins I was suspicious about a lot of the technical details, but I still enjoyed the film on a basic level because it was a rendering of Batman that did remind me of why I loved the character. The film rationalized a lot of technical details, but was wonderfully inventive with adding the Raz Ah Gaul plotline to describe his beginnings, among other things.
The sadness for me is that The Dark Knight is neither very good technically nor does it even remind me of my basic intrinsic interest in the character of Batman. Nolan in his reimagination has drained the character of all his essential qualities. He has made Batman and the series to be dramatic foil for something more, but in his idea to transcend the super hero genre I believe he has made a film that isn't even technically a Batman film.
My problems begin with something everybody is complimenting. People love that the tone and structure of the film has more to do with a crime drama than it does a super hero film. The first thing I noticed about the film was that Nolan wanted to take on a complicated plot with detailed analysis of the mob scene in Gotham City. The first half of the film is an exploration into how the city is taking on new methods to combat the mafia. The film could be argued as inducting itself into social analysis because it does look at multiple levels of crime and bureacy within the city.
I believe the film is interested in all these details, but none of the interest is really about a social analysis of a fictional city. The main interest of mafia focus is to show a system of order within the criminal world so the entrance of the Joker becomes that more embrasive because he totally disregards the rules, but the film just dedicates too much time and energy to what should have been just a story in the background or a subplot at best. The major problem is that the first half of the film is about something that is mainly meant to get the audience to understand that the Joker is a threat to order on all levels of life. A very simple message to the audience that could have been illustrated much easier and in a much simpler way. It really had nothing to do with social interest. That's absurd.
The tone reminded of Heat in that it was a straight laced story of professional killers and heroes acting professional, but as much that talk intrigues the audiences, it has no dramatic core or deeper meaning to it. The first half of the Dark Knight is much more interesting because of the plot ideas it has to imagine Batman in China going after a businessman in James Bond fashion. The fact that the film was able to do that without great question of the storyline is the most successful thing about it, but that has nothing to do with who Batman is or what he is about. It has everything to do with the wheels of a great plot idea turning. Heat is a fascinating movie, but it is a movie of an operatic movie style meant to allure the audience instead of getting them to sympathize with deeper moral questions.
The main problem in the film has to do with Batman. Once the film begins we are already knee deep in the storyline described above. Batman is the man who moves his way through out the puzzle to catch the mobsters and does so with cool confidence. We're interested because when we question his intelligence we see he was already a step ahead, but Batman is first served up to us as just a know it all.
The transition to his darker and more personal side becomes ridiculous. His character is frustrated with Joker's tactics because it leaves him immobile and unsure about how to react so we begin to notice Batman randomly walking into public situations and beating everyone up. When he does this we don't see him dealing with his problem to need to control everything, but as him just being Batman and intimidating the bad guys. The tone of these attacks replicate the cool crime drama tone only. It is further down the story that characters like Alfred and Lucious Fox began to tell Batman and the audience of what his problem really is. Lucious Fox even reveals things Batman has done to signify his deep character conflicts that the audience had no chance to be aware of. Their words are meant to be the dramatic ingrediants for us when the film should have made us aware of Batman's control issues beforehand. It should have laced the actions and happenings of Batman with their dramatic significance before they happened.
Then there is the question of his presence and tone. In Burton's original Batman did little actual fighting. Numerous scenes in the movie were about his presence and the fear he put into characters. The fights after saving Vicky Vale involve him doing stuff to bad guys, but it was minimal. The only other major fights were at the end on the roof top with the Joker's main men. The film was awesome to strike a tone with him that he was a character in the shadows and represented an idea. Batman Begins had the storyline to say he was an idea to crime figures, but Dark Knight shows him as just a cool operator of punishing people. When he enters an impossible situation, he does it with little suave and enters just from dark corners. The meat of the scenes then transition into him engaging in complicated martial arts and beating up everyone. I thought Batman Begins had a little too much of this because it smacks of Jason Bourne envy, but I felt the movie kept it to a decent minimum. I felt like Dark Knight abandonded the original tone of Batman entirely and purely focused on his fighting capabilities. In two seconds flat he would enter an impossible situation and spend three minutes beating up everyone. Little tone of Batman with how much the focus was on his physical attributes.
People may believe it showed this because Batman was in doubt about himself, but the tone of most of the fights match up with the tone of first half of the film: that Batman and Bruce Wayne are second guessed by others but rise to show they are smarter than everyone else. To show Batman was in true doubt or still learning would show him eventually lose in some of these impossible fighting situations, but he never does. His character has as much intricacy as an old Steven Segal character. Segal's characters would beat everyone up and he was meant to be portrayed as someone filled with emotional problems, but it always showed it with him just randomly beating up people only. The bulk of Batman's characterization is through this way as well. Sure, other characters and plot lines also come up to try to define his problems, but they come up much later in the film. Wayne's relationship with Rachel is only given a few scenes while Fox and Alfred spell out way too much about Wayne's problems. If you want to measure up the first half of the film for emotional inspection than a lot of it just resembles a bad Segeal movie.
Then there is the Joker. His character is by far the most interesting part of the film, but Nolan adds an old bad technique in which to portray him. Nolan always has his appearances coinside with elaborate criminal plots. It reminds me of Memento when the characterization of the characters were wrapped in an elaborate plot. Burton's original had Joker as a better presence. He was able to dominate more scenes and the audience was able to make sense of who he was from his actions. In Nolan's version we make sense of him from his complicated crime ideas. There are few times when Nolan goes to the character to just see him interact. Nolan realizes he needs to give the Joker some more meat so he allows him to make up lines about a troubled childhood, but the Joker doesn't need such an explanation. He just needs more time. The audience can believe some characters are just psychotic. I wish the film would have granted the Joker more physical time to interact with other characters and show how he was to develop himself. Instead we got a lot of talk about who he is from other characters and a lot of unnecessary explanation about his childhood. Nolan wanted to represent the Joker as a force, but explaining him that way didn't help.
Then there is Heath Ledger's performance. The good is that Ledger was able to imagine the Joker to be this way. I couldn't have pictured such a Joker but Ledger does it and pushes it to the extreme that was necessary. I just don't believe the creation was that great because Ledger focuses a lot of his role on make uo, vocal tone and physical gestures. It seems like he created a character that will be very easy for anyone else to mimic or copy. At least with Nicholson's performance you have Nicholson using a lot of his personality to will the character. No one else could do the role the way he did it. There is good in keeping a lot of your essential personality part of a role because it allows you to staple that role. It allows you to use essentials as an actor no one else can copy. All actors know how to mimic physical gestures and can do voice copies so the sad note about Ledger's performance is that had so little to do with Ledger himself. He truly concealed himself but that meant making a role I believe was a little too simplistic.
Then there is Harvey Dent and how he becomes Two Face. It's sad that a major character like this is only served up to come into existence and then immediately die. Some believe his character will live on, but I can't assume that will happen. What Two Face rising to and immediately dying means that the film was too casual and happy with the dramatic endings. In one scene you have Rachel die in a tragic fashion. That scene had the weight and meat to end a film. She was a major character and her death should have begun a new chapter for everyone involved. It did for Two Face but his character was immediately wiped out. That's ridiculous. You don't kill off a character of such importance so quickly especially when he was created out of one of the most important dramatic sequences for the entire movie. The film tries to add on meaning to his death by explaining how Batman became the Dark Knight from it, but that's rubbish. The final 20 minutes of the film had more dramatic happenings and changes than the rest of the whole film. The piling on of dramatic moments just reminded me of Spiderman 3. It tried to write off answers for every character when it could have let one situation define the movie and just explore the new subjects more in the next film, but everything had to be answered, whether it needed to or not. The film had too many endings to be legitimate.
People applaud Nolan for doing Batman anew, but I believe in the process he lost of a lot essential qualities about Batman that I loved. I believe this film was more a crime drama than it was a Batman film. One critic said it was a crime drama that just happened to have Batman in it. I concur.
That's a solid review and I agree with plenty of what you said, but towards the end it seems like you're brushing it off as a "crime drama". The idea is rooted back to Todd McFarlane and Spawn, his vision of a motion picture with his beloved super hero was mainly to be centered around the crime and city opposed to the actual super hero (Spawn). I thought the idea was brilliant when I read about it some 8 years ago... Now, with the Dark Knight, we see something similar but not quite. It's definitely refreshing to see the twist Nolan decided to take with the Batman franchise (a rather cheap attempt at McFarlane's vision), but the presence of Batman in the scenes he is in are just too prominent and vivid to dismiss the reality of the film being indeed about Batman.
The limits could be pushed more in that area, having him just linger in the shadows during scenes without making an extravagant entrance. Also, he doesn't have to speak every chance he gets. His words should be minimal, I'm sure such a hi-tech superhero can figure out means of communication without actually appearing in person. I'm one of the people that don't mind the Batman voice, even in the Nolan version, I just happen to think it was overused and that cheapens it.
I have no problems with attempts to change up the Batman series. Nolan is ambitious and should be, but making this film a crime drama first lead to a lot of problems. I understand how you see it parallel something more, but I think you're being a little too hopeful. whatever the intentions, the film should have had Joker, Batman (in a better prescribed tone) and Two Face more in the foreground and the societal depictions more in the background. The essence of character for Batman is most important and I felt it was lost in this film.
Even if I had control of the Batman series I would make enough changes to make the series look nothing like earlier incarnations, but I do understand a few essentials need to be carried over.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 22, 2008, 06:24:07 PM
The meat of the scenes then transition into him engaging in complicated martial arts and beating up everyone. I thought Batman Begins had a little too much of this because it smacks of Jason Bourne envy, but I felt the movie kept it to a decent minimum. I felt like Dark Knight abandonded the original tone of Batman entirely and purely focused on his fighting capabilities. In two seconds flat he would enter an impossible situation and spend three minutes beating up everyone. Little tone of Batman with how much the focus was on his physical attributes.
I disagree; Batman does away with the henchmen in that fashion, but his struggles with the main villains always required degrees of psychology - as they tried to convince each other of their real worth and what the world was really like. Batman subdued Joker through force, only to suffer awful consequences as he failed to get Joker to talk at all. The climatic struggle between the two was more interesting because Batman was able to make a point against what Joker believed to be true (though that in itself got wrapped with 10,000 other characters at stake as well), it was the same thing with Two-Face's dilemma at the end - the characters exchanged a lot of their own perspectives before trading blows; they did a lot of convincing. This was different from Batman Begins, which I thought was weak all around in terms of conflict resolution, both in terms of spectacle as well as drama. I know the struggles obviously focus a lot on the technology and the pyrotechnics, but I think the screenplay does try to boil them down to the differences in beliefs as much as it can, right before it ventures into Star Wars territory, anyways.
Quote from: pete on July 23, 2008, 01:35:51 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 22, 2008, 06:24:07 PM
The meat of the scenes then transition into him engaging in complicated martial arts and beating up everyone. I thought Batman Begins had a little too much of this because it smacks of Jason Bourne envy, but I felt the movie kept it to a decent minimum. I felt like Dark Knight abandonded the original tone of Batman entirely and purely focused on his fighting capabilities. In two seconds flat he would enter an impossible situation and spend three minutes beating up everyone. Little tone of Batman with how much the focus was on his physical attributes.
I disagree; Batman does away with the henchmen in that fashion, but his struggles with the main villains always required degrees of psychology - as they tried to convince each other of their real worth and what the world was really like. Batman subdued Joker through force, only to suffer awful consequences as he failed to get Joker to talk at all. The climatic struggle between the two was more interesting because Batman was able to make a point against what Joker believed to be true (though that in itself got wrapped with 10,000 other characters at stake as well), it was the same thing with Two-Face's dilemma at the end - the characters exchanged a lot of their own perspectives before trading blows; they did a lot of convincing. This was different from Batman Begins, which I thought was weak all around in terms of conflict resolution, both in terms of spectacle as well as drama. I know the struggles obviously focus a lot on the technology and the pyrotechnics, but I think the screenplay does try to boil them down to the differences in beliefs as much as it can, right before it ventures into Star Wars territory, anyways.
I'm not going to say you're wrong, but it takes forever for Batman to get to the point when he does deal with the main villians. There are enough fights and actions scenes to exhaust 3 versions of Burton's original Batman so by the time that Batman does meet up with the Joker and the script does take consideration of the theme I felt like it was all too little too late. I enjoyed some of the later scenes and developments, but so much about the early tone in this film completely put me off. Besides, the fact that the script took notice of the themes so late into the film runs parallel with my other complaints about the film trying to do too much too late in the film with the character issues.
Also, did anyone notice the amazing recovery by Roberts character? Batman throws him off a building and the fall obviously breaks both of his legs but he reappears by the end of the film walking comfortably. I didn't think the timeline in the film extended long enough for him to make a full recovery.
I dont think he was walking comfortably? I think he was wearing crutches or a cane? Not sure I though the same but then I noticed that.
spoilers
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 22, 2008, 06:24:07 PMHe has made Batman and the series to be dramatic foil for something more
did you mean to say 'a dramatic foil'? i know it's just a silly nitpick but i almost like the idea of dramatic foil if you meant that.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 22, 2008, 06:24:07 PMthe first half of the film is about something that is mainly meant to get the audience to understand that the Joker is a threat to order on all levels of life. A very simple message to the audience that could have been illustrated much easier and in a much simpler way.
what do you suggest? the money burning scene solidified, to me, that he is batman's greatest enemy because he's not in it for the money even after going to such great lengths to attain it. he's truly a student of a philosophy like batman.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 22, 2008, 06:24:07 PMThe tone reminded of Heat in that it was a straight laced story of professional killers and heroes acting professional, but as much that talk intrigues the audiences, it has no dramatic core or deeper meaning to it.
why not? i've read a snippet of an article comparing batman to bush and the joker to bin laden. i think the comparison is apt in many ways and that the application of justice is examined from several interesting, 'deep' perspectives within the film.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 22, 2008, 06:24:07 PMThe first half of the Dark Knight is much more interesting because of the plot ideas it has to imagine Batman in China going after a businessman in James Bond fashion. The fact that the film was able to do that without great question of the storyline is the most successful thing about it, but that has nothing to do with who Batman is or what he is about.
it has so much to do with what he is. he's above the law, but the powers at be direct him and accept his help.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 22, 2008, 06:24:07 PMNolan realizes he needs to give the Joker some more meat so he allows him to make up lines about a troubled childhood, but the Joker doesn't need such an explanation. He just needs more time. The audience can believe some characters are just psychotic. I wish the film would have granted the Joker more physical time to interact with other characters and show how he was to develop himself. Instead we got a lot of talk about who he is from other characters and a lot of unnecessary explanation about his childhood. Nolan wanted to represent the Joker as a force, but explaining him that way didn't help.
i'm confused. he made that stuff up. the
multiple origin monologues establish his enigmatic nature, which further speaks to the idea that without batman there would be no joker.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 22, 2008, 06:24:07 PMThe good is that Ledger was able to imagine the Joker to be this way. I couldn't have pictured such a Joker but Ledger does it and pushes it to the extreme that was necessary. I just don't believe the creation was that great because Ledger focuses a lot of his role on make uo, vocal tone and physical gestures. It seems like he created a character that will be very easy for anyone else to mimic or copy. At least with Nicholson's performance you have Nicholson using a lot of his personality to will the character. No one else could do the role the way he did it. There is good in keeping a lot of your essential personality part of a role because it allows you to staple that role. It allows you to use essentials as an actor no one else can copy. All actors know how to mimic physical gestures and can do voice copies so the sad note about Ledger's performance is that had so little to do with Ledger himself. He truly concealed himself but that meant making a role I believe was a little too simplistic.
i thoroughly disagree. look at the hundreds of daniel plainview impressions floating around. none of them are as good as ddl, and nothing about ddl in person is remotely plainviewish. acting is not simply performing a certain way. in your opening lines you acknowledge you couldn't imagine the joker the way ledger did. that's half the point. he imagined something previously unseen. maybe lots of other actors could do a perfect "ledger joker" (i also think a lot of actors could do a perfect "nicholson joker" for that matter) but none of those people could've concocted exactly what ledger did given the material. i feel acting is mostly in the interpretation, not the execution. though they are very much linked to each other.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 22, 2008, 06:24:07 PMThen there is Harvey Dent and how he becomes Two Face. It's sad that a major character like this is only served up to come into existence and then immediately die. Some believe his character will live on, but I can't assume that will happen. What Two Face rising to and immediately dying means that the film was too casual and happy with the dramatic endings.
i must say i love the idea of two-face as a guy with nothing to lose on a suicidal rampage. it makes him far more threatening and unstoppable than a guy who doesn't necessarily want to die. i think his death works dramatically because he was in constant physical and psychological pain and had a death wish. it's very difficult to sustain that. especially since he has no interest in stealing money.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 22, 2008, 06:24:07 PMOne critic said it was a crime drama that just happened to have Batman in it. I concur.
it's an ensemble for sure, but all the crime drama comes from the presence of batman and the questioning of what he really is. which i found fascinating.
Quote from: picolas on July 23, 2008, 04:30:58 AM
what do you suggest? the money burning scene solidified, to me, that he is batman's greatest enemy because he's not in it for the money even after going to such great lengths to attain it. he's truly a student of a philosophy like batman.
You can keep a similar storyline and acquire similar results, but just realize most of what happens in the first half of the film leaves us to desire more from the Joker. Yes, because of the criminal plots we understand he is Batman's greatest enemy, but don't make that the only way we get to understand him. Make him a true character in the Batman world and explore him on a general level. Other people also wished they got a more vivid portait of him in the film. Nolan short changes him by only associating him with his devious plots.
Quote from: picolas on July 23, 2008, 04:30:58 AM
why not? i've read a snippet of an article comparing batman to bush and the joker to bin laden. i think the comparison is apt in many ways and that the application of justice is examined from several interesting, 'deep' perspectives within the film.
Are you serious? I think you're going to have to explain your idea instead of me explain mine because that's ridiculous and as much of an over interpretation as you can get. Nolan has repeatedly referenced that he made the Dark Knight with influence from James Bond films for its tonal structure. It means he wanted the crime elements of the story to embrace its stylistic influences more which is the opposite of providing for a good organic storyline.
Quote from: picolas on July 23, 2008, 04:30:58 AM
it has so much to do with what he is. he's above the law, but the powers at be direct him and accept his help.
Rationalization. I actually didn't give a shit that he went to China, but I was annoyed by the tone the subplot had in making him look more like a secret agent than Batman. You can tell Nolan was very impressed with the technical ideas of how Batman extracted the businessman and got away so only focused on highlighting that part which is the part that had little to do with Batman's mystique. It reminded me of what a Bond film would be interested in.
Quote from: picolas on July 23, 2008, 04:30:58 AM
i'm confused. he made that stuff up. the multiple origin monologues establish his enigmatic nature, which further speaks to the idea that without batman there would be no joker.
It didn't come off that way. He only had a few times to explain his past and each time he said things that pretty much coincided with each other so even if it was meant to explain his enigmatic nature or whatever, it looked like to the audience it was based on truth. Each story had something to do with the other. All were about an abusive father. He didn't use the same story each time but he did say stories that seemed to come out of the same vein.
Quote from: picolas on July 23, 2008, 04:30:58 AM
i thoroughly disagree. look at the hundreds of daniel plainview impressions floating around. none of them are as good as ddl, and nothing about ddl in person is remotely plainviewish. acting is not simply performing a certain way. in your opening lines you acknowledge you couldn't imagine the joker the way ledger did. that's half the point. he imagined something previously unseen. maybe lots of other actors could do a perfect "ledger joker" (i also think a lot of actors could do a perfect "nicholson joker" for that matter) but none of those people could've concocted exactly what ledger did given the material. i feel acting is mostly in the interpretation, not the execution. though they are very much linked to each other.
The difference with Plainview and the Joker is that Plainview is based on characteristics that only a talented actor could accomplish. Daniel Day Lewis creates a facade of mannerisms and vocal tones to create him, but the role leads to points where only the actor Daniel Day Lewis could have accomplished the role. I speak of scenes when Plainview shows inner anger and despair over what he lost when he realizes the brother he thought he met again never really was him. Day Lewis the actor does have to recall old moments of other performances to dig at those scenes. Ledger's Joker keeps his character just crazy on the one level of craziness he creates for the character. A structure for a great character is with how rounded it is. Joker isn't, but maybe he never was meant to be. It could be a no win situation for him but the fact I recognize Jack in Nicholson's interpretation of Joker means only his personality could have accomplished it. When people mimic Nicholson, they do so for his voice, but his role is based on numerous facets of who he is and that can't be copied. It has everything to do with Nicholson's acting intangibles. Ledger plays a foreign character that doesn't resemble him at all. Because it is such a make up job you can replicate it. Day Lewis had no make up so he gave the character significant depth by just his own looks. Not so with Ledger at all.
Quote from: picolas on July 23, 2008, 04:30:58 AM
i must say i love the idea of two-face as a guy with nothing to lose on a suicidal rampage. it makes him far more threatening and unstoppable than a guy who doesn't necessarily want to die. i think his death works dramatically because he was in constant physical and psychological pain and had a death wish. it's very difficult to sustain that. especially since he has no interest in stealing money.
You're short changing a major character in the series. Is that as interesting as a guy who was Bruce Wayne's best friend and became a crime figure, thus always staying as a constant reminder of Batman's limitation and defeats to not be able to do everything? In the cartoon Batman tries to make himself available to Two Face hoping he will see Harvey Dent come out but slowly gives up when he sees Dent is lost forever. A plot line to show Batman losing Harvey Dent to the crippling nature of psychosis slowly but surely would be an awesome way to dig at the nature of Batman and his isolation with being unable to retain friends but with your description we get a very generic idea of love lost and craziness created. The most important character in the series was killed off so the film could enjoy a 15 minute free for all of someone gone mad? Seems a little like a joke to me.
Quote from: picolas on July 23, 2008, 04:30:58 AM
it's an ensemble for sure, but all the crime drama comes from the presence of batman and the questioning of what he really is. which i found fascinating.
I admit the film gives the themes good lip service at the end, but it's all futile.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 23, 2008, 06:54:08 AMQuote from: picolas on July 23, 2008, 04:30:58 AM
i'm confused. he made that stuff up. the multiple origin monologues establish his enigmatic nature, which further speaks to the idea that without batman there would be no joker.
It didn't come off that way. He only had a few times to explain his past and each time he said things that pretty much coincided with each other so even if it was meant to explain his enigmatic nature or whatever, it looked like to the audience it was based on truth. Each story had something to do with the other. All were about an abusive father. He didn't use the same story each time but he did say stories that seemed to come out of the same vein.
one was about a father, another had to do with a wife and no mention of a father
- heath owns this movie. not a single other actor in the thing can hold a candle to him.
- there are moments in this where it took every fiber of my being not to just jump up and down in my seat and cheer. i almost felt like i was watching a concert at some parts. the audience was great.
- that being said, this is ADD filmmaking. the film never stops to take a breath. each scene felt rushed and truncated, often missing emotional beats they clearly wanted to hit. as a result it's a bit exhausting and definitely felt long.
- i felt some of the editing was pretty sloppy and confusing. characters would disappear and reappear without explanation (why didn't we see Dent and Rachel being abducted?) again, i wished the film just slowed down. i don't think there's more than 4 consecutive minutes without suspense-inducing score.
- i thought bale was actually the weakest in this. while the words coming out of his mouth were layered and interesting, his portrayal was so one-dimensional. he has one look the entire film, and at times i found myself caring more/rooting for the joker.
- i like aaron eckhart, but his two-face felt forced, and when he shared the frame with joker, well, there was no contest. generally, two-face was not nearly as interesting or captivating as the joker.
- i would agree with the camp that found batman's voice way over-the-top. many of his lines got laughs (and not in the good way)
- i'm not really a motorcycle guy, but i want that motorcycle. like bad.
Quote from: I Love a Magician on July 23, 2008, 09:25:02 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 23, 2008, 06:54:08 AMQuote from: picolas on July 23, 2008, 04:30:58 AM
i'm confused. he made that stuff up. the multiple origin monologues establish his enigmatic nature, which further speaks to the idea that without batman there would be no joker.
It didn't come off that way. He only had a few times to explain his past and each time he said things that pretty much coincided with each other so even if it was meant to explain his enigmatic nature or whatever, it looked like to the audience it was based on truth. Each story had something to do with the other. All were about an abusive father. He didn't use the same story each time but he did say stories that seemed to come out of the same vein.
one was about a father, another had to do with a wife and no mention of a father
Alright, I step down from that criticism.
GT
the Burton films are not the Bible. Batman Returns has often been accused of being a Tim Burton film and less a Batman film, but I love it anyway. i'm up for different interpretations of the character as long as they are successful. who says Batman couldn't be a crime drama? also: despite Burton's films having minimal action sequences in them, that doesn't mean that the comics don't. of the 2 1/2 hour running time i would think over 2 hours would still be not action, so what's the problem here?
Batman going to Hong Kong is to further illustrate that "Batman has no limits". as the Joker points out leaving Gotham City is not going to deter him. it also broadens the scope of the film like Begins to include a world outside of Gotham.
you completely missed the boat on the Joker backstory. they're all BS. that's the point, it doesn't matter what made him this way. he is this way and a backstory would be too convenient. he had two separate stories as to how he got the scars. how would he get them when he was a kid and then get them again when he had a wife? c'mon dude, read any interview with Nolan and Co. to confirm this. sorry you were confused.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 23, 2008, 06:54:08 AM
You can keep a similar storyline and acquire similar results, but just realize most of what happens in the first half of the film leaves us to desire more from the Joker. Yes, because of the criminal plots we understand he is Batman's greatest enemy, but don't make that the only way we get to understand him. Make him a true character in the Batman world and explore him on a general level. Other people also wished they got a more vivid portait of him in the film. Nolan short changes him by only associating him with his devious plots.
that doesn't mean anything. understanding him ruins everything. you realize that. the best way to make a villain not scary is to 'understand' him and why he's doing something and what made him that way. the joker arrives in the film fully formed, only as the film goes on do you understand what he is doing.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 23, 2008, 06:54:08 AM
Quote from: picolas on July 23, 2008, 04:30:58 AM
why not? i've read a snippet of an article comparing batman to bush and the joker to bin laden. i think the comparison is apt in many ways and that the application of justice is examined from several interesting, 'deep' perspectives within the film.
Are you serious? I think you're going to have to explain your idea instead of me explain mine because that's ridiculous and as much of an over interpretation as you can get. Nolan has repeatedly referenced that he made the Dark Knight with influence from James Bond films for its tonal structure. It means he wanted the crime elements of the story to embrace its stylistic influences more which is the opposite of providing for a good organic storyline.
are YOU serious? did you really think that any 9/11 parallels in this film were unintentional? did you see Batman standing over the wreckage of the
World Trade Center building? it may not be as clear as Bush/Bin Laden but the theme of this film is clearly about justice and where is the line in trying to obtain it, trying to do whats right, failing.
i think this film went over your head.
GT, it seems like you really went out of your way to NOT like this. I find it odd, since you're usually the first person to give credit to fluff when all others dismiss it as garbage. This is the type of movie that's fluff, but the kind of fluff that deserves praise. I'd think you'd be all over this flick (in a positive way)
I don't get you sometimes, good friend.
Quote from: modage on July 23, 2008, 09:54:32 AM
the Burton films are not the Bible. Batman Returns has often been accused of being a Tim Burton film and less a Batman film, but I love it anyway. i'm up for different interpretations of the character as long as they are successful. who says Batman couldn't be a crime drama? also: despite Burton's films having minimal action sequences in them, that doesn't mean that the comics don't. of the 2 1/2 hour running time i would think over 2 hours would still be not action, so what's the problem here?
Never said they were. In fact I just like the first one while I don't care too much about the second one, but while Burton shows he has little clue for handling a screenplay or even be able to make it somewhat interesting, he does know the right tone and mannerism in which to strike up Batman. If I had to compare the Burton original with the Dark Knight, I'd say the former is only about the character of Batman while the latter is an attempt to rejuvunate the storyline of the series. For various reasons I believe too much attention was paid on trying to innovate the storyline and not enough attention was paid on the character.
Quote from: modage on July 23, 2008, 09:54:32 AM
you completely missed the boat on the Joker backstory. they're all BS. that's the point, it doesn't matter what made him this way. he is this way and a backstory would be too convenient. he had two separate stories as to how he got the scars. how would he get them when he was a kid and then get them again when he had a wife? c'mon dude, read any interview with Nolan and Co. to confirm this. sorry you were confused.
Already admitted my mistake. It happens. Try to get some enjoyment out of this small victory for you.
Quote from: modage on July 23, 2008, 09:54:32 AM
that doesn't mean anything. understanding him ruins everything. you realize that. the best way to make a villain not scary is to 'understand' him and why he's doing something and what made him that way. the joker arrives in the film fully formed, only as the film goes on do you understand what he is doing.
You over interpret what I mean by understanding him. I never said I wanted his origins and reason for being who he is explained. In fact in my original review I said I didn't. Please pay attention to what I say, but come on, as the film is currently told, we have numerous characters trying to
explain who he is. That's ridiculous. Just give the audience more time to be with the Joker for them to understand (relax) his nuances and appreciate the terror he strikes in people. I didn't want half the attempt to be spelled out in dialogue by characters.
Quote from: modage on July 23, 2008, 09:54:32 AM
are YOU serious? did you really think that any 9/11 parallels in this film were unintentional? did you see Batman standing over the wreckage of the World Trade Center building? it may not be as clear as Bush/Bin Laden but the theme of this film is clearly about justice and where is the line in trying to obtain it, trying to do whats right, failing.
Realize what I commented on. All I said is that the film had no parallels to Batman being Bush and Joker being Bin Laden. That's going too far. I understand a lot of genre films like to recall 9/11 in non-specific ways when dealing with brutal subjects in a NYC setting. That's understandable. Nobody will take the film and interpret it as political but films have always recalled tragic settings going back to Godzilla movies with the atomic bombings. I accept that but I believe its wrong to get into political talk which is what you do with bringing up Bush and Bin Laden.
Quote from: Stefen on July 23, 2008, 10:09:31 AM
GT, it seems like you really went out of your way to NOT like this. I find it odd, since you're usually the first person to give credit to fluff when all others dismiss it as garbage. This is the type of movie that's fluff, but the kind of fluff that deserves praise. I'd think you'd be all over this flick (in a positive way)
I don't get you sometimes, good friend.
I really expected to like this. I was shocked I didn't. My level of dissapointment was comparable to the feelings I felt when watching There Will be Blood.
I feel more comfortable giving credit to fluff because all it tries to be is fluff. Those movies make no attempt to challenge my critical senses. The Dark Knight is ambitious and means to be more than just fluff so I unexpectedly saw my radar go up. I wasn't getting any enjoyment out of the first hour so I started to look at the film with different eyes. I love Batman, but this isn't Batman to me. It's an experiment gone wrong. I realize I can't just say that and expect to be believed in so I had to write a thorough review. Those are my feelings.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 23, 2008, 10:10:25 AM
Quote from: modage on July 23, 2008, 09:54:32 AM
you completely missed the boat on the Joker backstory. they're all BS. that's the point, it doesn't matter what made him this way. he is this way and a backstory would be too convenient. he had two separate stories as to how he got the scars. how would he get them when he was a kid and then get them again when he had a wife? c'mon dude, read any interview with Nolan and Co. to confirm this. sorry you were confused.
Already admitted my mistake. It happens. Try to get some enjoyment out of this small victory for you.
but does this mistake not show how hard you look for the negative in everything?
i wonder what it was you expected to like. because judging from the trailers and as a follow up to
Begins, it should have produced fulfillment.
Quote from: Pozer on July 23, 2008, 12:13:40 PM
but does this mistake not show how hard you look for the negative in everything?
No, it does not. It just shows mistakes happen. I've raved about films for specific details that I was wrong about. It happens.
Quote from: Pozer on July 23, 2008, 12:13:40 PM
i wonder what it was you expected to like. because judging from the trailers and as a follow up to Begins, it should have produced fulfillment.
No. As most everyone agrees, the film is different than Batman Begins. Plus the trailers don't advertise the unecessary amount of time spent to details in the film that has nothing to do with Batman and Joker. The trailers just show the Joker and Batman so as far I'm concerned they are misleading.
just curious why you expected to like it. i wonder sometimes if when a flaw comes about in a movie, it provokes you to focus the majority of your attention on the ones to come. cause that is no way to enjoy a movie. i would've given up on them long ago if this was my case. do you ever wonder why you're in the minority most of the time? even when giving credit to fluff you are, yes? maybe the answer is you discovered you love to be in the minority long ago and just kept at it. the mistake you made here seemed like such an obvious one not to make therefore seems like you are on a quest to find flaws. the movie is not perfect. this doesn't mean it is pretty terrible. and the reality is they didn't set out to make a pretty terrible movie or try to make fluff. they aimed high and achieved greatly as your friends or whoever you saw it with most likely expressed. but the clockwork in your head seems to receive and digest the good qualities negatively because the imperfections started at whatever point they started at. maybe you need to delete some cookies & files in your head cuz it's remembering and recognizing bad movies you saw at the time you're watching decent ones.
i kid, i kid. this all comes from my perspective and is strictly curiosity.
i just took the Burton Batman as the legit story having never read any of the comics, but it presents quite a different situation than Nolan's:
The Joker is directly responsible for killing Bruce's parents
and Batman is directly responsible for dropping The Joker in the vat (although not likely purposefully) and causing his physical state.
from my extensive research **cough**wikipedia**cough** i garner that it's never said in the comics that The Joker was responsible for the elder Wayne's demise.
comic fans feel free to tear this apart, i really don't know.
I wonder if the reviews are driving this, the hype, Heath Ledger, or what it is... but this movie just made 200 million in 5 days, which is incredible. Its on route to make way over 400 million, but even considering that everyone who already saw it says they will see it again, who knows.
I guess we discussed before that a lot of people in this board dont give a shit about these things, but anyone who is trying to make movies for a living has a lot to learn analyzing these cases.
Quote from: Pozer on July 23, 2008, 02:38:54 PM
just curious why you expected to like it.
Because I liked a lot of Batman Begins and felt that with Batman now developed they would get into better themes and adventures with him. A lot of my problems with Begins has to do with the filmmakers feeling it necessary to explain every iorta of detail to how he came about. Some was necessary, but much of it wasn't. I felt the film series would take off because of that.
Quote from: Pozer on July 23, 2008, 02:38:54 PM
i wonder sometimes if when a flaw comes about in a movie, it provokes you to focus the majority of your attention on the ones to come.
Sometimes it makes me wonder if the flaw will continue and so I look for that, but with Dark Knight I spent the first hour wondering where the film was going with the storyline. I wasn't into the story but still relaxed and letting the images just sink in. Once I saw how stupid the first half of the film was then I started to dissect the story more. Later scenes got me back into the flow because I started to enjoy the plot, but I realized too many mistakes were made to make the overall film good.
Quote from: Pozer on July 23, 2008, 02:38:54 PM
do you ever wonder why you're in the minority most of the time?
I know why. I look for things in movies to be good that most other people don't have as high priorities. Having been on the board for a while I can tell which films will make an impact on the board when they will do little for me. People on the board care more about technical details in the filmmaking than I do. I consider style important, but I don't consider it to be so important. Films still haven't broken the three act play structure where you can solely criticize a film on its stylistic content. I think style a lot of times makes people overlook other things. I look at a lot of things within the film, like story, characterization and purpose of content. You can talk for a while about those things without mentioning style. If I was dealing with non-linear experimental films then I would be totally into the stylistic questions.
Quote from: Pozer on July 23, 2008, 02:38:54 PM
even when giving credit to fluff you are, yes?
I just don't turn on my critical hat for thinking films, but I'm also the kind of guy who admits he has a soft spot for action films and the like. But, with a film like Iron Man, I think a lot of disfavor on the board came because the film was considered so good and it was just what it was. Like Burton's original Batman, it has no major innovation with the structure at all. It is a basic action film so I believe a lot of people here were confused with the praise. It held firm with a genre I liked and I loved the little things the director did to change things. The changes weren't as dramatic as Dark Knight but it made the film more enjoyable to me.
Quote from: Pozer on July 23, 2008, 02:38:54 PM
maybe the answer is you discovered you love to be in the minority long ago and just kept at it.
I really only post when I feel I have something to say. I agree I have a different vantage point with movies in general, but I don't force myself to post disagreements to just do it. I've been on this board since the beginning and only really post when I feel I can contribute something. Usually that comes with a disagreement. I saw Wall E and had nothing to add with what's already been said. I do go on marathon arguments about certain movies, but I also avvoid numerous topics and don't care to post on them. I like that my posts are a little longer because I don't believe I'll ever post as frequently as some. I check the board everyday but am never tempted to just post to post.
Quote from: Pozer on July 23, 2008, 02:38:54 PM
the mistake you made here seemed like such an obvious one not to make therefore seems like you are on a quest to find flaws. the movie is not perfect. this doesn't mean it is pretty terrible. and the reality is they didn't set out to make a pretty terrible movie or try to make fluff. they aimed high and achieved greatly as your friends or whoever you saw it with most likely expressed.
I saw the film with people who were experts of the Dark Knight comic books. I just found out today they were very unhappy with the film. I felt I was alone because I was coming from a different viewpoint than them, but I just got back from hearing how upset they were. One couple who came sorta liked it but I'm surprised I didn't hate it the most out of my group. The hardcore comic book fans did. The truth is the more people I talk to the more I find out not everyone really loved it. Lots of people had probems.
Quote from: Pozer on July 23, 2008, 02:38:54 PM
but the clockwork in your head seems to receive and digest the good qualities negatively because the imperfections started at whatever point they started at. maybe you need to delete some cookies & files in your head cuz it's remembering and recognizing bad movies you saw at the time you're watching decent ones.
The point of my long reviews is to make you to stop with the bad assumptions. It's suppose to lay out why I disliked the film for such and such reasons. The fact you can't accept what i say is all about you and has nothing to do with me. If anything I should suspect all of you who say with three sentences or less why you love something and continually question me and feed me shit about everything I say. You guys don't criticize what I say, but go on long diatrabes about your weird ideas to why I say them. It's ridiculous. You can question anyone with such an intent of focus. My reviews give people enough evidence to question my opinions.
Quote from: Pozer on July 23, 2008, 02:38:54 PM
i kid, i kid. this all comes from my perspective and is strictly curiosity.
You've always had me on your radar. I never knew you existed until I was repeatedly getting slammed by you. Alexandro will go after my reviews, but you fit the demographic of people who will go after me. Honestly, you don't bug me as much as others because you do come with a little bit of a sense of humor so I appreciate that.
I'll always be happy to explain myself. I don't try to hide behind any veil of arrogance. I say things you may say are arrogant, but I always believe I have to defend and prove what I say. I think I should considering I do take on negative reviews more often because I feel they are more useful.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 23, 2008, 10:10:25 AM
Realize what I commented on. All I said is that the film had no parallels to Batman being Bush and Joker being Bin Laden. That's going too far. I understand a lot of genre films like to recall 9/11 in non-specific ways when dealing with brutal subjects in a NYC setting. That's understandable. Nobody will take the film and interpret it as political but films have always recalled tragic settings going back to Godzilla movies with the atomic bombings. I accept that but I believe its wrong to get into political talk which is what you do with bringing up Bush and Bin Laden.
Action and horror films (not to mention comic books) frequently tap into the contemporary political climate, whether or not the audience notices it. Not that most HW films are allegories like The Crucible, but the political element is usually there in some form when a film has villains and heroes on a grand scale. The hospital exploding in such a visceral matter in The Dark Knight clearly was meant to evoke 9/11.
I loved The Dark Knight. Yes, there are flaws, but for me the film was greater than the sum of its parts. It didn't feel like I was watching a Comic Book Movie. The film totally brought these characters to life. I agree, though, that the last half hour or so was anti-climactic. Aaron Eckhart (and even Christian Bale) were overshadowed by Heath Ledger as the Joker.
Quote from: Ravi on July 23, 2008, 04:01:18 PM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 23, 2008, 10:10:25 AM
Realize what I commented on. All I said is that the film had no parallels to Batman being Bush and Joker being Bin Laden. That's going too far. I understand a lot of genre films like to recall 9/11 in non-specific ways when dealing with brutal subjects in a NYC setting. That's understandable. Nobody will take the film and interpret it as political but films have always recalled tragic settings going back to Godzilla movies with the atomic bombings. I accept that but I believe its wrong to get into political talk which is what you do with bringing up Bush and Bin Laden.
Action and horror films (not to mention comic books) frequently tap into the contemporary political climate, whether or not the audience notices it. Not that most HW films are allegories like The Crucible, but the political element is usually there in some form when a film has villains and heroes on a grand scale. The hospital exploding in such a visceral matter in The Dark Knight clearly was meant to evoke 9/11.
Do you really argue me or agree with me? I pretty much agree with you while feeling what I originally said was accurate too. The Godzilla reference, I believe, is the best one. It speaks to a climate that was in Japan after the Atomic Bomb dropping. It doesn't specifically depict the situation, but reminds viewers of what kind of world they now live in.
i think its a little bit hypocritical to give Iron Man a pass because it had no aspirations to be great and beat down the Dark Knight because it did. shouldn't Iron Man be punished for laziness? better to try and fall short then not to try at all.
rougerum, roger what you said.
Quote from: modage on July 23, 2008, 04:46:24 PM
i think its a little bit hypocritical to give Iron Man a pass because it had no aspirations to be great and beat down the Dark Knight because it did. shouldn't Iron Man be punished for laziness? better to try and fall short then not to try at all.
No, because intention matters. I can't fault Iron Man for what it doesn't try to be. And no form of Iron Man before this film was really masterpiece material so its not like the new film was skimping or anything. It tried to be entertaining and funny and I felt it accomplished that. When I say my critical senses weren't alerted I meant I understood the film was only trying to be a piece of entertainment. You watch the film differently. Dark Knight was trying to be innovative in serious ways so it was asking to be criticized on a higher level. The film asks to be applauded with more serious works so it deserves the scrutiny.
This just in! The Dark Knight OFFICIALLY named best movie of all time
Yes indeed dear movie connoisseurs, you have casted your votes and after mere hours out : The Dark Knight has taken the #1 spot in the IMDB Top 250 list.
Thank you for your participation !
i like reading what you have to say (though i never agree with you) so Keep Ya Head Up
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmembers.aol.com%2Fsubseven%2Ftupac.jpg&hash=54314293ebe41f1fbe47416452421d63e6cff568)
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 23, 2008, 04:18:51 PM
Do you really argue me or agree with me? I pretty much agree with you while feeling what I originally said was accurate too. The Godzilla reference, I believe, is the best one. It speaks to a climate that was in Japan after the Atomic Bomb dropping. It doesn't specifically depict the situation, but reminds viewers of what kind of world they now live in.
A little of both. Bush = Batman and Bin Laden = Joker is too specific, but that kind of parallel might be useful in discussing the political climate within the film. Its certainly not a 1:1 correlation.
this movie was fucking gaaaaay.
i want to believe that you guys know what you're talking about, but after reading this thread, i trust no one. a better movie must be opening up this summer. but what? i suppose the truth is out there. somewhere.
Quote from: Ravi on July 24, 2008, 02:45:59 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 23, 2008, 04:18:51 PM
Do you really argue me or agree with me? I pretty much agree with you while feeling what I originally said was accurate too. The Godzilla reference, I believe, is the best one. It speaks to a climate that was in Japan after the Atomic Bomb dropping. It doesn't specifically depict the situation, but reminds viewers of what kind of world they now live in.
A little of both. Bush = Batman and Bin Laden = Joker is too specific, but that kind of parallel might be useful in discussing the political climate within the film. Its certainly not a 1:1 correlation.
i was never saying the movie makes a direct, intentional comparison to bush v. bin laden. i was saying that the fact people can draw those parallels credibly means there's a deepness to the story and the relationships in the film beyond 'just talk'.
Quote from: picolas on July 24, 2008, 08:18:24 PM
Quote from: Ravi on July 24, 2008, 02:45:59 AM
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 23, 2008, 04:18:51 PM
Do you really argue me or agree with me? I pretty much agree with you while feeling what I originally said was accurate too. The Godzilla reference, I believe, is the best one. It speaks to a climate that was in Japan after the Atomic Bomb dropping. It doesn't specifically depict the situation, but reminds viewers of what kind of world they now live in.
A little of both. Bush = Batman and Bin Laden = Joker is too specific, but that kind of parallel might be useful in discussing the political climate within the film. Its certainly not a 1:1 correlation.
i was never saying the movie makes a direct, intentional comparison to bush v. bin laden. i was saying that the fact people can draw those parallels credibly means there's a deepness to the story and the relationships in the film beyond 'just talk'.
Yea, we agree. A little misunderstanding.
So what was the point of Scarecrow being in this? It just made him look like a chump that nobody cares about.
i think that's pretty much it. the guy who was the second biggest threat in begins is easy prey now because batman has his shit together.
I definitely noticed the familiar Bush words in this movie - but I don't think it's for idealistic purposes. It is quite like the Matrix people fervently checking off all sorts of religions and philosophies, just so the audience thinks there's more depth. Batman is the same way - it does go pretty dark with the characters, but the political stuff is quite shallow and seems like throwaways just so the audience will be convinced that they're watching something deeply relevant.
Quote from: bonanzataz on July 24, 2008, 08:02:17 PM
this movie was fucking gaaaaay.
i want to believe that you guys know what you're talking about, but after reading this thread, i trust no one. a better movie must be opening up this summer. but what? i suppose the truth is out there. somewhere.
i was wrong. that movie sucked too.
Quote from: ©bama on July 23, 2008, 09:30:55 AM
- heath owns this movie. not a single other actor in the thing can hold a candle to him.
- there are moments in this where it took every fiber of my being not to just jump up and down in my seat and cheer. i almost felt like i was watching a concert at some parts. the audience was great.
- that being said, this is ADD filmmaking. the film never stops to take a breath. each scene felt rushed and truncated, often missing emotional beats they clearly wanted to hit. as a result it's a bit exhausting and definitely felt long.
- i felt some of the editing was pretty sloppy and confusing. characters would disappear and reappear without explanation (why didn't we see Dent and Rachel being abducted?) again, i wished the film just slowed down. i don't think there's more than 4 consecutive minutes without suspense-inducing score.
- i thought bale was actually the weakest in this. while the words coming out of his mouth were layered and interesting, his portrayal was so one-dimensional. he has one look the entire film, and at times i found myself caring more/rooting for the joker.
- i like aaron eckhart, but his two-face felt forced, and when he shared the frame with joker, well, there was no contest. generally, two-face was not nearly as interesting or captivating as the joker.
- i would agree with the camp that found batman's voice way over-the-top. many of his lines got laughs (and not in the good way)
- i'm not really a motorcycle guy, but i want that motorcycle. like bad.
These were mostly the exact feelings I had.
I really wanted to love the movie. I ended up
liking it, which was fine. Heath Ledger
is the movie, as so many people have been saying, and I would gladly see it a few more times just for him. The kind of intense character creation he did here was something you only see from actors like Philip Seymour Hoffman. It was flawless.
I definitely think the biggest problem was the editing, and I don't think that opinion was influenced by the fact that the movie I saw just a couple days previous (Persepolis) was ruined by horrible editing (or simply the pacing of the script itself, who knows). Nothing really resonated with me outside of the Joker character, at least not in the same way, and certainly not on the same level.
When the movie tries to be important and political, I think it tends to trip over itself. The surveillance bit, for example, was just silly and poorly written. There's been so much journalism and analysis about these things that, if you're going to mention them at all, you really need to say something insightful. Especially if your audience is remotely familiar with political issues.
Here's another problem I had, just after seeing the film. Maybe it's just my ignorance of Batman character subtext or whatever, but the dark knight doesn't seem very dark. Gary Oldman pretty much turns to the camera seventeen times to tell us that Batman is an anti-hero. I mean really, what's dark about him, besides his costume? Christian Bale's performance certainly wasn't dark. What's anti-heroic? Batman behaves ethically for the most part (except for smacking around his prisoner, perhaps, and the aforementioned surveillance) and lives within his own little code. Sure, his interference brought about more crime. I got that message. Repeatedly. Batman gets it too, as he tells us. Repeatedly. And it's only a byproduct of his good intentions in the first place. Some one help me out here.
I haven't read most of this thread, so apologies if I repeated stuff.
nolan probably just wanted that title to stress how much darker his movies are. i think the ending justifies it, when batman becaomes 'the hero gotham needs'.
any political intentions in this movie went over my head. :yabbse-undecided: bringing the surveillance technology into it i just took as a crappy plot device to ensure batman is able to rescue every hostage against impossible odds. i didn't think any more thought went into it. i may be embarrassed i said that after a second viewing..
edit - it didn't take a second viewing, only a joint. i didn't put enough thought into that post, it makes more sense that the hostage situation would revolve around the surveillance plot and not vice versa so i retract that comment.
I'm wondering whether people are starting to be clouded by their aspirations for this film and have stopped embracing it for what it is. All this talk of it being a "crime drama" is a bit silly; it's a super-hero movie. And a great one at that. It sometimes seems like people are sidelining it into another genre in order to critque it more seriously. That's kind of flattering in one respect but it is also a betrayal.
QuoteBatman is the same way - it does go pretty dark with the characters, but the political stuff is quite shallow and seems like throwaways just so the audience will be convinced that they're watching something deeply relevant.
Does anyone want or expect it to be deeply, politically relevant? A film can only do so much within it's run-time and (although it's kind of defeatist to say it) whilst having to deal with applying a huge budget and achieving the required spectacle. I really don't think the film was trying to trick us into thinking it was smarter than it actually is. I think it's more a case of people reading far too much into it and then being disappointed when they come up short.
Quote from: Redlum on July 26, 2008, 02:33:45 PM
whilst having to deal with applying a huge budget and achieving the required spectacle. I really don't think the film was trying to trick us into thinking it was smarter than it actually is. I think it's more a case of people reading far too much into it and then being disappointed when they come up short.
because no big budget film has ever tried to be smarter than it is?
Does anyone else think they should have just let Joker plunge to his death while giggling? I know Batman doesn't kill anyone and that's why they had him save the Joker at the end, but by this point of the film Batman wasn't that Batman anymore.
Quote from: Redlum on July 26, 2008, 02:33:45 PM
I'm wondering whether people are starting to be clouded by their aspirations for this film and have stopped embracing it for what it is. All this talk of it being a "crime drama" is a bit silly; it's a super-hero movie. And a great one at that. It sometimes seems like people are sidelining it into another genre in order to critque it more seriously. That's kind of flattering in one respect but it is also a betrayal.
I don't think the crime drama talk is silly. It's a reflection of certain style choices the film does make. You're right to say it doesn't make up the content of the film, but most people have always talked about style choices in relation to films. It seems pretty natural to expect. I faulted the film for not being a very good Batman film, but that's just me.
Quote from: Stefen on July 26, 2008, 05:46:31 PMbut by this point of the film Batman wasn't that Batman anymore.
I'm sorry, but I still don't see it. By definition, he
was still that Batman, because he
didn't let the Joker fall. So I'll ask again.
What's so dark about the dark knight? (Please read what I wrote above before you answer.)
Quote from: Redlum on July 26, 2008, 02:33:45 PMDoes anyone want or expect it to be deeply, politically relevant? A film can only do so much within it's run-time.
Like I said:
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman on July 26, 2008, 01:16:31 AMif you're going to mention them [political issues] at all, you really need to say something insightful.
And this really has nothing to do with run time. We could make a long list of films that have said something politically insightful with only a sliver of screen time, and without breaking the fourth wall. Even a super-hero comic book movie? Sure. HULK, for example.
Oh, and if anyone is interested in seeing an
actual "war on terror" super-hero movie, re-watch the first Spider-Man. I picked it up the first time I saw it, and it infuriated me. (Though when I posted my interpretation here, I don't think I got any agreement.)
listen, people are going to justify this movie for years by saying that it works on TWO levels blah blah.. its the same with matrix and fight club and every other movie that hangs on the wall of the bro down the hall. say what you will about the dark knight but its not great because of its ideas, its great because its so cool! its about a group of equally enthusiastic people applauding as batman does a really neat trick on his bike, its about the joker leaning out the window of the cop car his face against the city lights and everyone going quiet for just a second. if theres poetry and meaning in this movie its moments like that. how can you deny such a rare and awesome sense of solidarity?
Quote from: JG on July 26, 2008, 08:27:09 PMits about the joker leaning out the window of the cop car his face against the city lights and everyone going quiet for just a second. if theres poetry and meaning in this movie its moments like that.
Totally see what you're saying. And I would love the movie if that's all it did. But I think it reaches farther... and tends to fail when it does.
iron-man mentions plenty of politcal issues but nobody felt the need to critique it on that basis. i don't get why this gets that treatment because it conveys a more realistic approach to the superhero genre. it's still a superhero movie. every political gesture pushes the plot forward. like i said i may be embarrassed i took this stance after seeing the movie again or until someone offers a more elaborate explanation on why this movie is trying to be political and important. i think jb has a point about he surveillance part but that's it.
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman on July 26, 2008, 07:48:36 PM
I'm sorry, but I still don't see it. By definition, he was still that Batman, because he didn't let the Joker fall. So I'll ask again. What's so dark about the dark knight? (Please read what I wrote above before you answer.)
i don't recall him being labeled 'the dark knight' until the title card (the end) so i assumed you were referring to the title. if im wrong, i see your confusion. if not, i don't understand the question.
SPOILERS
The significance of Batman as The Dark Knight is basically revealed through the ending (although it's also revealed by the always-insightful Alfred in the middle of the movie when he said that Batman could take being hated). Basically, because Batman will be seen by the public as a bastard who was responsible for several deaths in Gotham, he will be held as the opposite of Harvey Dent--a White Knight in the public's eyes. Y'know, it's symbolic and shit.
So The Dark Knight is to Batman what Billionaire Playboy Jerk is to Bruce Wayne--neither is true to the core of Batman or Mr. Wayne, but rather is what each can afford to be perceived as.
So, JB, I think that you're right when you say that Batman is not a dark person. He's a straight-up hero who is so heroic that he is willing to get a bad rep as long as he knows that he is doing the right thing and saving as many lives as he can. But to Joe Gotham-Dweller, he's dark as hell.
Hopefully that makes it less problematic for you.
That makes sense, matt. Thank you.
I think what confused me was people in this thread saying that the Batman character was actually dark or had become darker during the course of the film, which I think is absolutely wrong. He's so not dark, in fact, that he's willing to be wrongfully perceived as dark for the greater good.
Quote from: JG on July 26, 2008, 08:27:09 PM
listen, people are going to justify this movie for years by saying that it works on TWO levels blah blah.. its the same with matrix and fight club and every other movie that hangs on the wall of the bro down the hall. say what you will about the dark knight but its not great because of its ideas, its great because its so cool! its about a group of equally enthusiastic people applauding as batman does a really neat trick on his bike, its about the joker leaning out the window of the cop car his face against the city lights and everyone going quiet for just a second. if theres poetry and meaning in this movie its moments like that. how can you deny such a rare and awesome sense of solidarity?
I think that's pretty accurate. Dark Knight has many drool worthy moments that you really don't see in other mainstream movies. People think I was immune to enjoying any part of this film. Not so. Each moment JG just mentioned was a lot of fun, but I didn't find them to be intoxicating enough to recommend the whole movie. See, when I talk to people who really do like the movie, everyone talks about the Joker, but when I ask them if they felt the first half was way too long, they also agree with me there. Then when I ask them if disliking the first half affected their opinion, they say no and remind me how much they liked the Joker. I'm over fifteen people in asking those questions to and its a pretty consistent answer.
I didn't like the movie, but I don't think you have to have interest in criticism to resist the temptation to give yourself over to the effects. Movies are one of the easiest things to enjoy and sometimes you can see through the praise and realize maybe the reason why people like something is very simple.
After reading the 30 pages of this thread, I'm surprised very few people have mentioned the one thing that bothered me about this movie: too much explaining of the themes. During the first hour different characters kept saying who is batman, who is the joker and why he's a menace. "He has no rules" and all that...I don't understand why they had to repeat this shit over and over as if it was impossible for the audience to get what this film is about and why it's villain it's such a menace...And I think it diminished the impact of the awesome, magnificent scene of the interrogation with the Joker. I would have been rocked out of my head if that was the first time we hear some explanation for his behaviour.
The editing also bothered me a bit, and all the incomplete scenes / situations, but I get that it was done so the pace of the film could be as fucking exhilarating, and the pace is, at the same time, one of the reasons it is so great.
Batman's voice....Interesting what you guys are saying about him still finding his voice, but it still looks silly and takes you out of the movie.
Aside from those three things the film is pretty incredible, and if you don't see it in IMAX you're not really seeing it.
I gotta give Eckhart some due because I thought he was fantastic.
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman on July 26, 2008, 01:16:31 AMif you're going to mention them [political issues] at all, you really need to say something insightful.
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanAnd this really has nothing to do with run time. We could make a long list of films that have said something politically insightful with only a sliver of screen time, and without breaking the fourth wall. Even a super-hero comic book movie? Sure. HULK, for example.
It is to do with run-time because HULK failed to deliver on some of it's other obligations as an action/comic-book movie. It's not necessarily about a matter of time in terms of runtime either, it's also about devoting development time to what is most important.
I just read the 2 star SundayTimes review (http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/film_reviews/article4386375.ece?openComment=true) of the Dark Knight, it's kind of ridiculous.
QuoteNolan explicitly signals the connection in the opening shot - a camera, like a silent plane, flies towards the window of a skyscraper. And, for its chief villain, we have the Joker (Heath Ledger), who collects hostages and sets off bombs. There's also Batman's unlawful rendition of the mob's accountant from Hong Kong. This heavy-handed, wearisome 9/11 connection is the artistic equivalent of a fake tan: it provides the film with instant, spray-on seriousness. For art-house chaps such as Nolan and his screenwriter brother Jonathan, it's a way of showing that they haven't just made a big, dumb summer blockbuster: oh, no, they have made a big, thinking blockbuster that engages the masses in important issues.
The 9/11 analogy just doesn't make sense, though. The idea that the Joker is some kind of urban terrorist figure, as he is referred to at one point, is absurd. "Some men just want to watch the world burn," says Lt James Gordon (Gary Oldman), and that's true, but they're called pyromaniacs, not terrorists. Bin Laden and co don't do it for the kicks that come from chaos, as the Joker does.
It's just incredibly pompous. He makes his own presumptions about the directors intentions for political parallels and then shoots them down. There is no way that any discernable parallels in the film are explicit enough to make the assumption that they are deliberately constructed predominantly for the purpose of being insightful political commentary. Why don't we just play Dark Side of the Moon alongside the film and see if it sticks? What it amounts to is that this film has ideas above its station and therefore exposes itself to this kind of 'back in your place' bashing.
Quote from: Jeremy Blackmanif you're going to mention them [political issues] at all, you really need to say something insightful.
Firstly, I don't really think it does mention them (at least not explicitally). The only concocted parallel I've seen anyone bring up is Batman's sonar. That was a slightly il-conceived way to do do some high-technology, make an action sequence more efficient and then have some pointless musings on the patriot act and erosion of privacy from Morgan Freeman. Probably the weakest part of the film.
Quote from: AlexandroAfter reading the 30 pages of this thread, I'm surprised very few people have mentioned the one thing that bothered me about this movie: too much explaining of the themes.
A potential reason is that this movie needs to speak to it's key demographic (10-20 years) and they aren't necessarily going to be as politically aware as someone like JB. I'm not saying that they require being repeatedly bludgeoned with the films ideas and themes in order to recognise them but they aren't going to be actively looking for them admidst the stuff that they come to see the film for.
Addressing the voice issue, I think this was explained in Batman Begins. It's been awhile since I've seen it, but I think the suit that Lucius made for Batman actually alters Bruce's voice when he speaks. Sure, the filmmakers have control over what that voice sounds like, but I'm able to get past it due to the thought that it is actually the suit making him sound that way.
I don't think they're explaining the scenes as much as they are getting to the core of the story. bruce/ batman's being haunted by something, and at every plot point, he and the audience get to know what it is until the very end when he realizes what is bothering him. but this thread is getting ridiculous!
Quote from: Redlum on July 27, 2008, 10:32:52 AMHULK failed to deliver on some of it's other obligations as an action/comic-book movie.
Which ones?
"Dark Knight" director surprised at film success
Christopher Nolan, director of the new Batman sequel "The Dark Knight," said on Tuesday even he was surprised at the film's box office success which has shattered records in North American theatres.
Batman buried his rivals at the North American box office for a second weekend on Sunday, racing past $300 million in a record 10 days, distributor Warner Bros. Pictures said.
"When you do a film of this scale, you are certainly hoping to reach a large number of people. But I think we all have been completely taken by surprise by the scale of the film's success in America particularly," Nolan told reporters in Tokyo.
"I would not be able to point to exactly what it is ... If I knew that all my films would have been successful," he added at the event to promote the film, which opens in theatres across Japan on August 9.
A week after it scored a record breaking $158 million opening, "The Dark Knight" added a new title to its list of superlatives: the best second weekend, passing the holiday-boosted $72 million haul of 2004's "Shrek 2."
Just six days after its release in North America, the film had grossed more domestically than its predecessor, "Batman Begins," did in its entire run, according to studio Warner Bros, which is owned by Time Warner Inc.
English filmmaker Nolan had also directed 2005's "Batman Begins."
The $180 million "The Dark Knight," which stars Christian Bale as Batman and late actor Heath Ledger as the Joker, is reportedly drawing strong repeat business.
While I think most of the criticism over The Dark Knight's politics excessively magnifies the importance of the parallels between Nolan's fantasy and our reality I also think that politics should never be manipulated, influenced, or even mentioned in fantasy. I've said this before. Even with the best intentions all the artist can do is complicate further the actual, tangible force of the political message. For example: the chore of decoding what, if any, message is to be found in The Dark Knight. I'd say the danger is in confusing morality and politics, and/or in simplifying what is complex. The real world, and its politics, will always be infinitely more subtle than what is required from fantasy.
So I think Nolan should have avoided drawing out any similarities between the basically moronic Batman legacy and contemporary politics. I mean moronic historically, as in the idea of a costumed superhero has taken a long while to earn its now semi-esteemed reputation, and if the genre wishes to move forward, as it appears to be doing this year, it should remember of course that its films are inhabited by literal mask wearers, exaggerated and identifiable villains, and its cities are much more curious, fantastic, and imaginative than real cities. Or least until as a people we can pay as much attention to politics as we do fantasy. I'm sure at least a few others here wish there were as many people paying as close attention to this years' elections as this fucking Dark Knight film. I'm saying that when my kid wants to learn about politics, he better not learn those politics from films like this.
That said, I repeat that I think the criticisms amplify what is there. Nolan, in my opinion, should have separated his story from civics, but clearly the film's themes overlap into the present political climate. The politics are hardwired into this story. Difficult to avoid. Because some of the themes are further reaching than what we're used to from superhero movies it's natural to react defensive against the idea. What I don't see a lot of people saying is that Nolan didn't have to distend the story out into politics. That's where his characters were headed. Harvey Dent is a politician, the film is very much about the politics of Gotham city, politics are naturally contradicting, the film is about the dark doubles of its characters, and in realistic terms actually exploring all this Nolan drew upon a very real, very immediate example of conflicting intentions within a political organization. So politics influence The Dark Knight, but in no way do I think Nolan is meaning The Dark Knight to influence politics.
Politics, politics. Just hint at them, just allude to them in a blockbuster and everyone goes berserk. Very big deal. I thought there was an hour of great filmmaking in The Dark Knight, and an extra hour or so of the film open for terrific debate. Scenes like the SWAT/Semi truck chase and the boats rigged to blow were pulse quickening. The first hour was sluggish and lame. Ledger is amazing. The Nolan brothers' writing of the Joker character is amazing. He's a force that pushes the whole film forward, and when you're wondering why the fuck you have to see another superhero costume designed, when you're so sick of superhero costume designs being an integral part of the structure of these films, there's always the Joker lurking in the scenes. Someone was saying that it's jarring and kind of lousy filmmaking the way The Dark Knight is edited together and scenes seem unlinked and unmotivated. I agree with that person. The unintentional effect this had on me was that I begin to wonder when the Joker was going to appear next. I began to anticipate nervously his next arrival, just like the city in the film. Because I don't know when the hell he's going to pop up next.
I thought the movie was pretty good overall. This year's We Own the Night.
i'm sick of this movie/thread.
#1 at the B.O. again. Suck on that Encino Man.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sean-astin.net%2Fgallery%2Falbums%2Fencino%2520man%2Fencino_man089.jpg&hash=b6bcb4403aeb69de18fae22de4272d29fc753b81)
Monday Movie Buzz: Bale's Batman voice too much?
Though "The Dark Knight" has been a bona fide cultural event, boasting rave reviews and boffo box office, it hasn't been immune to criticism. Some have quibbled with its political undercurrents, and others have criticized a muddled theme.
But here's the critique most widely held: Why does Batman talk like the offspring of Clint Eastwood and a grizzly bear?
Donning the costume for the second time, Christian Bale has delved deeper into the lower registers. As Bruce Wayne, his voice is as smooth as his finely pressed suits. But once he puts the cape on, the transformation of his vocal chords is just as dramatic as his costume change.
Particularly when his rage boils over, Bale's Batman growls in an almost beastly fashion, reflecting how close he teeters between do-gooder and vengeance-crazed crusader.
"The Dark Knight" hauled in $43.8 million to rank as Hollywood's top movie for the third straight weekend, fending off "The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor," which opened a close second with $42.5 million. It has earned $394.9 million in just 17 days, according to studio estimates Sunday.
Though much of the voice effect is Bale's own doing, under the guidance of director Christopher Nolan and supervising sound editor Richard King, the frequency of his Batman voice was modulated to exaggerate the effect.
Critics and fans have noticed.
"His Batman rasps his lines in a voice that's deeper and hammier than ever," said NPR's David Edelstein.
The New Yorker's David Denby praised the urgency of Bale's Batman, but lamented that he "delivers his lines in a hoarse voice with an unvarying inflection."
Reviewing the film for MSNBC, Alonso Duralde wrote that Bale's Batman in "Batman Begins" "sounded absurdly deep, like a 10-year-old putting on an `adult' voice to make prank phone calls. This time, Bale affects an eerie rasp, somewhat akin to Brenda Vaccaro doing a Miles Davis impression."
Before the similes run too far afield, it's worth considering where the concept of a throaty Batman comes from.
In his portrayal on the `60s "Batman" TV series, Adam West didn't alter his voice between Bruce Wayne and Batman. Decades later when Tim Burton brought "Batman" to the big screen in a much darker incarnation, Michael Keaton's inflection was notably but not considerably different from one to the other.
But it was a lesser-known actor who, a few years after Burton's film, made perhaps the most distinct imprint on Batman's voice. Kevin Conroy, as the voice of the animated Batman in various projects from 1992's "Batman: The Animated Series" right up until this year's "Batman: Gotham Knight," brought a darker, raspier vocalization to Batman.
Conroy has inhabit the role longer than anyone else and though animated voice-over work doesn't have the same cachet as feature film acting, there are quarters where Conroy is viewed as the best Batman of them all certainly superior to Val Kilmer or George Clooney.
The animated series are notable because they drew on the DC Comics of Batman as envisioned by Frank Miller, whose work heavily informs "Batman Begins" and "The Dark Knight." (Bale and Nolan were unavailable to comment for this story.)
As Batman has gotten darker, his voice has gotten deeper. As some critics suggest, Bale and "The Dark Knight" may have reached a threshold, at least audibly.
walrus and i were discussing bale's batman voice the other day, and i liked his rationale: aside from needing to sound tough to criminals and other people he saves, the voice is used by Wayne to discourage people from making a link between Wayne and Batman.
That much should be generally obvious and i suppose whether it's overdone is more of the issue than why it is the way it is... but note as the article above did that prior actors have not made much if any vocal distinction between wayne/batman.
Quote from: reinhold on August 03, 2008, 09:38:05 PM
walrus and i were discussing bale's batman voice the other day, and i liked his rationale: aside from needing to sound tough to criminals and other people he saves, the voice is used by Wayne to discourage people from making a link between Wayne and Batman.
That much should be generally obvious and i suppose whether it's overdone is more of the issue than why it is the way it is... but note as the article above did that prior actors have not made much if any vocal distinction between wayne/batman.
yeah but he should have gone the other way and used a really high, girly voice for batman. NOBODY would be able to figure that shit out.
Quote from: reinhold on August 03, 2008, 09:38:05 PM
walrus and i were discussing bale's batman voice the other day, and i liked his rationale: aside from needing to sound tough to criminals and other people he saves, the voice is used by Wayne to discourage people from making a link between Wayne and Batman.
That much should be generally obvious and i suppose whether it's overdone is more of the issue than why it is the way it is... but note as the article above did that prior actors have not made much if any vocal distinction between wayne/batman.
Ehh, I'm not convinced. The voice is still embarassing. It's not like the idea of changing your voice hasn't been done before for similar reasons. Keaton also changed his voice to suplant an idea that Batman and Bruce Wayne were two different people, but Keaton only alters the tone slightly. He deepens it a little so he still room to manuever some acting under the mask. Bale's Batman has two tones and one sounds forced (normal serious tone) and the other sounds ridiculous (tough guy act).
On another note, I watched Dark Knight again. The second viewing was better for certain aspects of the film. I am now convinced the Joker is a great character and has an exellence presence within the film. He uplifts the story to make it better and more interesting.
The film could have still been more detailed and vivid about Joker, but for what it is, it is a great creation of a decent idea to create the sense of anarchy within a system of order. The quasi realistic approach to the filmmaking helps the Joker because he doesn't come off as a cartoon figure in a cartoon world, but a criminal who really does look like the sideshow among common criminal types. The audience never gets comfortable to his presence but they are able to be attracted to it because he is so mysterious and unpredictable. The major success of the Dark Knight (for me) is the existence of Joker and how he operates within the world. It's a idea of plot and little depth, but it's a great rendering nonetheless.
The plot problems elsewhere were still there and as this film is called the Dark Knight and is about Batman's descent into darker avenues of himself, I still don't believe the portrait was very good. A lot of the drama was spoken by other actors and a lot of the dramatics involving Two Face and Rachel are still way too melodramatic and half ass for what it could have been.
As far as Alexandro saying the themes were spoken too much, I agree. It has nothing to do with plot points when after the first bank heist the bank manager (while dying from being shot by the Joker) says exactly what the Joker represents to society and order. That character makes points that are relevant to dramatic ideas later on by other characters. All this shouldn't be so nicely summed up in the first major scene. That's ridiculous. The fact Joker would go after a mob bank should be enough explanation about who he is early in the movie.
Article about Batman's voice on CNN
http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/08/04/mondaymoviebuzz.darkknight.ap/index.html
Quote from: kal on August 04, 2008, 12:16:54 PM
Article about Batman's voice on CNN
http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/08/04/mondaymoviebuzz.darkknight.ap/index.html
Quote from: MacGuffin on August 03, 2008, 09:04:44 PM
Monday Movie Buzz: Bale's Batman voice too much?
Though "The Dark Knight" has been a bona fide cultural event, boasting rave reviews and boffo box office, it hasn't been immune to criticism. Some have quibbled with its political undercurrents, and others have criticized a muddled theme.
But here's the critique most widely held: Why does Batman talk like the offspring of Clint Eastwood and a grizzly bear?
Donning the costume for the second time, Christian Bale has delved deeper into the lower registers. As Bruce Wayne, his voice is as smooth as his finely pressed suits. But once he puts the cape on, the transformation of his vocal chords is just as dramatic as his costume change.
Particularly when his rage boils over, Bale's Batman growls in an almost beastly fashion, reflecting how close he teeters between do-gooder and vengeance-crazed crusader.
"The Dark Knight" hauled in $43.8 million to rank as Hollywood's top movie for the third straight weekend, fending off "The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor," which opened a close second with $42.5 million. It has earned $394.9 million in just 17 days, according to studio estimates Sunday.
Though much of the voice effect is Bale's own doing, under the guidance of director Christopher Nolan and supervising sound editor Richard King, the frequency of his Batman voice was modulated to exaggerate the effect.
Critics and fans have noticed.
"His Batman rasps his lines in a voice that's deeper and hammier than ever," said NPR's David Edelstein.
The New Yorker's David Denby praised the urgency of Bale's Batman, but lamented that he "delivers his lines in a hoarse voice with an unvarying inflection."
Reviewing the film for MSNBC, Alonso Duralde wrote that Bale's Batman in "Batman Begins" "sounded absurdly deep, like a 10-year-old putting on an `adult' voice to make prank phone calls. This time, Bale affects an eerie rasp, somewhat akin to Brenda Vaccaro doing a Miles Davis impression."
Before the similes run too far afield, it's worth considering where the concept of a throaty Batman comes from.
In his portrayal on the `60s "Batman" TV series, Adam West didn't alter his voice between Bruce Wayne and Batman. Decades later when Tim Burton brought "Batman" to the big screen in a much darker incarnation, Michael Keaton's inflection was notably but not considerably different from one to the other.
But it was a lesser-known actor who, a few years after Burton's film, made perhaps the most distinct imprint on Batman's voice. Kevin Conroy, as the voice of the animated Batman in various projects from 1992's "Batman: The Animated Series" right up until this year's "Batman: Gotham Knight," brought a darker, raspier vocalization to Batman.
Conroy has inhabit the role longer than anyone else and though animated voice-over work doesn't have the same cachet as feature film acting, there are quarters where Conroy is viewed as the best Batman of them all certainly superior to Val Kilmer or George Clooney.
The animated series are notable because they drew on the DC Comics of Batman as envisioned by Frank Miller, whose work heavily informs "Batman Begins" and "The Dark Knight." (Bale and Nolan were unavailable to comment for this story.)
As Batman has gotten darker, his voice has gotten deeper. As some critics suggest, Bale and "The Dark Knight" may have reached a threshold, at least audibly.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv160%2Fcapnduffle%2Fchristianbalebatman.gif&hash=bc9a6a59e492d15dac5fe8c92bd5e4e16cf8a9de)
that was dumb.
thanks for wasting my time cinemanlicsak. (pronounce it "Cinnamon Lick Sack")
Quote from: jtm on August 14, 2008, 04:56:26 AM
that was dumb.
thanks for wasting my time cinemanlicsak. (pronounce it "Cinnamon Lick Sack")
I'm sure that those were the two minutes in your life that you were really going to make a difference and change the world. My bad.
He was probably scratching his balls and eating a bowl of fruity pebbles while watching it, so I don't understand why he considers it wasting his time.
It's not a jewel or anything but if you think of it in the context of the Liam Lynch/ Dan Deacon lizard video I think it passes for amusing. I won't post that video for fear or stealing 3 more minutes of anyone's valuable time.
I don't lick sack. There. That's out there.
sorry cine. i was in a pissy mood last night. i shouldn't have taken it out on you.
and for the record, it was lucky charms.
Quote from: kal on August 14, 2008, 10:02:00 PM
Yeah probably definitely fake. But looks pretty goodfake!
also, fake
Quote from: jtm on August 15, 2008, 01:03:17 AM
sorry cine. i was in a pissy mood last night. i shouldn't have taken it out on you.
and for the record, it was lucky charms.
No worries, everyone has off days. And for the record I was a little high when I found that .gif so amusing.
I'm seeing this tonight at IMAX. I've only seen it once before. Not on IMAX.
I'm worried it's not going to be as good as I remember it.
trust me, it can only improve on imax. i loved the way in which, on the imax showing i went to, every member in that packed audience shut the fuck up at the same time on the very first shot of the film.
http://io9.com/5037573/dark-knight-inspires-copycat-crimes-over+reactions
just an incredible movie start to finish!!
i saw it.
Quote from: hauntedtony on August 18, 2008, 04:53:21 PM
just an incredible movie start to finish!!
Quote from: hauntedtony on August 18, 2008, 04:53:37 PM
pretty funny movie
Quote from: hauntedtony on August 18, 2008, 04:53:51 PM
very very funny
Quote from: hauntedtony on August 18, 2008, 04:54:06 PM
this movie was horrible
Quote from: hauntedtony on August 18, 2008, 04:54:30 PM
this movies twist ruined everything
This is EXACTLY how i feel about the dark knight.
Quote from: squints on August 18, 2008, 08:48:33 PM
Quote from: hauntedtony on August 18, 2008, 04:53:21 PM
just an incredible movie start to finish!!
Quote from: hauntedtony on August 18, 2008, 04:53:37 PM
pretty funny movie
Quote from: hauntedtony on August 18, 2008, 04:53:51 PM
very very funny
Quote from: hauntedtony on August 18, 2008, 04:54:06 PM
this movie was horrible
Quote from: hauntedtony on August 18, 2008, 04:54:30 PM
this movies twist ruined everything
This is EXACTLY how i feel about the dark knight.
LOL. who is that guy and why is he here?
No Two-Face In Third "Batman"
By Garth Franklin
Thursday, September 4th 2008 12:15am
Though Heath Ledger's turn as The Joker scored most of the critical notices for "The Dark Knight", Aaron Eckhart's work as Harvey 'Two-Face' Dent' scored much praise as well.
Now, out doing promotions for "Towelhead", the actor confirms that the character will definitely not be a part of the next film."He's dead. I asked Chris if there was a chance of coming back. 'No way,' he said. 'He's toast.'" he told CHUD.
Was he signed for another film? He tells SHH that "No, I'm not coming back. I think unfortunately, Heath [Ledger] was supposed to go on and that didn't work out. I'm nobody. I'm a cog. I have no say over this sort of stuff. I'm sure that there's so many other characters that they could whip together. I heard Angelina Jolie was going to be Catwoman or something like that. I thought that was a great idea. I'd like to be in that one."
Two things stand out - 1.) Two Face as a character was truly wasted. I thought there was a chance he could come back because his death was a little vague, but nope. I believe this confirmation by Eckhart. 2.) I'm not sure Nolan will continue with a third Batman if there is no Ledger. If the idea was to continue with Joker then I'm sure he had a pretty good idea of what they wanted to do. Nothing written to script form, but there had to be a conceptual idea of how Batman's story was to end. Maybe a good enough idea where you can't just fit someone else into the role.
I believe Nolan is searching for the good idea to make him continue the series. I say it's 50/50 whether he finds it.
i bet you're leaning more towards the hope that he won't return since the last one
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 19, 2008, 09:34:53 PM
was pretty terrible.
Quote from: Pozer on September 04, 2008, 11:41:04 AM
i bet you're leaning more towards the hope that he won't return since the last one
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet on July 19, 2008, 09:34:53 PM
was pretty terrible.
No, because they will make a third regardless of Nolan's involvement. Warners has already confirmed that. Nolan made a decent version of Batman in Begins and he still gives the series the best chance for quality stuff.
I also think because it will be the third and final film they will have to take the themes more seriously. That should make for a better film.
They should just drop the costumes and superhero crap altogether and go for a serious romantic dramedy tone. To make it more serious of course.
why so serious?
my friend decided him and i were the last people to see the dark knight, so we went tonight. batman is so badass. on the way out my friend goes, "i didnt like his voice, he sounded like a wild animal" im like "he is a wild animal, hes a bat" too easy
'Dark Knight' Star Aaron Eckhart Downplays Analogy Between Batman, George W. Bush
But the actor admits the movie is 'a mirror of our times.'
Source: MTV
He's a vigilante whose response to an overwhelming terrorist threat is to walk the path of good intentions straight into a moral quagmire. He supports extraordinary rendition, wiretapping and, shall we say, "refined interrogation techniques." He's the Dark Knight, a man Commissioner Gordon calls the hero the citizens deserve, but not the one they need.
But browse the Internet and you'll find papers like the Wall Street Journal, among others, calling him something else as well: an analogy for President Bush.
Setting aside whether having Batman mirror the commander in chief is a good thing, does the Caped Crusader at least tangentially mirror George W. Bush?
"I don't think [director] Chris [Nolan] would agree, and certainly that wasn't the intention," "Dark Knight" star Aaron Eckhart told MTV News of textual and subtextual themes in this summer's highest-grossing movie.
But while Eckhart insists that "The Dark Knight" is simply "good drama for good movies," he does agree that there are deliberate parallels to current events, even if there aren't any answers on how to deal with them.
"I agree [with the analogy] in a way," Eckhart said. "Of course [it has analogies]. When I read 'The Dark Knight' for the first time, I saw a lot of political issues. You know, obviously today's culture seeped in. It's a mirror of our times.
"[But] if you really break 'The Dark Knight' down, it's vigilantism," he added. "You're talking about a guy who takes the law into his own hands and [uses] extraordinary means to control the crime in the city. I don't think there was any conscious effort by [Nolan] to tackle any contemporary issues or problems" by means of one-to-one metaphors.
"Dark Knight" plans re-release for Oscar push
Batman wants an Oscar. To be precise, Warner Bros. wants a statuette -- or 10 -- for "The Dark Knight." So the studio plans to re-release its blockbuster Batman sequel in January, the height of Academy Awards voting season.
"It's just a matter of bringing it back as a reminder for people," a studio insider explained.
Warner Bros. domestic distribution president Dan Fellman acknowledged ongoing talks with Imax execs over the prospect of restoring the Christian Bale starrer to some giant-screen venues in January. It's uncertain if "Dark Knight" also will reappear in conventional venues at that point.
Directed by Christopher Nolan, the film's huge commercial and critical success has spurred talk of possible Oscar nominations for its director, producers and cast -- most specifically Bale's co-star, Health Ledger, for the late actor's edgy performance as the Joker.
To date, "Dark Knight" has rung up about $512 million domestically and $440 million internationally, including more than $55 million in Imax grosses. A pre-Oscars re-release would help assure its topping $1 billion worldwide.
But with the title set to hit DVD in December, it's now apparent anyone hoping the Batman sequel would soar to "Titanic" heights will be disappointed. "Dark Knight" already ranks as the second-highest-grossing movie ever, after "Titanic's" phenomenal $1.84 billion -- a mix of $600.8 million in domestic box office and $1.24 billion in foreign coin registered in 1997 and 1998.
Warner Home Video has just officially announced the U.S. DVD and Blu-ray Disc release of The Dark Knight on (again, just as predicted) 12/9. Available on that day will be a single-disc DVD (SRP $28.98 - separate widescreen and full frame versions), a 2-disc DVD Special Edition (SRP $34.99) and a 2-disc Blu-ray (SRP $35.99). The single-disc DVD will include just the film itself. The 2-disc DVD will include the film, plus the Gotham Uncovered: Creation of a Scene documentary, The Dark Knight IMAX Scenes (the ability to view the 6 IMAX sequences in their original framing), 6 episodes of the fictional Gotham Tonight news program, galleries of poster art and production stills, and a Digital Copy version of the film. The Blu-ray will include all that, plus the exclusive Batman Tech: The Incredible Gadgets and Tools and Batman Unmasked: The Psychology of The Dark Knight featurettes, additional galleries (Joker Cards, concept art), trailers, TV spots and BD-Live enhancement. The movie on the Blu-ray will also be enhanced with something called Focus Points. All the video features will be in full HD on the Blu-ray, and the audio will be Dolby TrueHD. The Blu-ray Disc will apparently also be available in Limited Edition packaging featuring a replica of the Batpod (pictured below), but we don't know yet if this is a retailer exclusive or if it will be more widely available.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedigitalbits.com%2Farticles%2Fmiscgfx2%2Fdarkknightbatpodbrd.jpg&hash=183761b08c13fdcbf50525590e186d4754fb4f18)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedigitalbits.com%2Farticles%2Fmiscgfx2%2Fdarkknightbrdopen.jpg&hash=e32921571db1e58eab1f1edc0e833b56f8eaca80)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedigitalbits.com%2Farticles%2Fmiscgfx%2Fcovers5%2Fdarkknight2discseusdvd.jpg&hash=bbb78bcf750056c7d98d003d9283395b3a0e4c15)
Mac, you've been hunting down for that pod already, haven't you...
Quote from: omuy on September 29, 2008, 10:28:29 PM
Mac, you've been hunting down for that pod already, haven't you...
Oh, yes, it will be mine.
Christopher Nolan on 'Dark Knight' and its box-office billion: 'It's mystifying to me'
By Geoff Boucher; LOs Angeles Times
Ths is the first of a three-part interview with Christopher Nolan, the director of the astoundingly successful summer film "The Dark Knight," which has pulled in $528 million in the U.S. alone (a total second only to "Titanic") and has worldwide grosses that are now approaching the $1 billion mark.
The 38-year-old London native has just returned home to Los Angeles (where he attended the Spike TV Scream 2008 Awards) after a monthlong stay at Anna Maria Island on the west coast of Florida where, along with playing on the beach with his children, he contemplated the commercial success of his grim superhero epic — as well as the industry buzz about the film's chances during the upcoming Oscar season. In today's installment, he talks about the perceived politics of the movie, his plans for the future and that staggering box-office total.
GB: Welcome back to L.A. So I'm curious, tell me one of the surprises you've had during the journey of this film after its release on July 18.
NOLAN: It's funny, I've been asked a lot about the politics of the film. I dismiss all such analogies [laughs]. It really isn't something we think about as we put the story together, myself, David Goyer and Jonathan [Nolan, brother of the director]. But I would point to the interrogation scene with Batman and the Joker — not that there is a specific political point, per se — but that I was interested in getting the actors to explore a paradox: How do you fight somebody who essentially thrives on aggression?
GB: I winced when I read a lot of the political messaging that people said they detected in your film. I think a lot of that says more about my industry than it does yours.
NOLAN: [Laughs] "Yes, you may be right."
GB: It seems to me that, more often than not in a genre such as the one you're working in, most of the political messaging has more to do with the viewer than the filmmaker. It's inferred, not implied.
NOLAN: I agree completely. Especially if you do it right. If you're working in a genre that is heightened reality. I like to talk about these films as having an operatic quality or being on a grand scale and a bit removed from the rhythms of real life, no matter how realistic we try to make the scenes themselves. In this scene, for instance, we went for the gritty realism in the textures of it, but it is a heightened reality. We're trying to work on a more universal scale. If you get that right, people are going to be able to bring a wide variety of interpretations to it depending on who they are. It's allowing the characters to be a conduit to the audience. Allowing an audience to sit there and relate to Batman and his dilemma whether they are Republican or Democrat or whatever. ...
GB: "The Dark Knight" is closing in on $1 billion. How do you get your arms around that kind of success?
NOLAN: I can't get my arms around it, to be quite frank. It's mystifying. It's terrific but at the same time it's a little abstract, the numbers are so big. The biggest thrill for me would be, with the number of people who have gone to see the film, how 'The Dark Knight' stood on the shoulders of the first film, how we were able to build the audience up and build the story up from the first film. That was really exciting to see. We were all pretty happy with the performance of the first film but so we really didn't know, 'Where does it go from there?' For it to become such a phenomenon is extraordinarily gratifying. I mean, I've spent now like six years or something working on Batman films. It becomes an important part of your life; you become very obsessive about it, and its pretty fun when there are other people sharing your obsession and going to see the film a dozen times or whatever.
Wrapping your arms around the scale of the success, as you ask, I don't find that possible really. There's something liberating in knowing that my next film, whatever it is, isn't going to make as much money [laughter]. I don't have to try for years.
GB: As far as a follow-up, have you considered "Batman and the Mystery of the Titanic"?
NOLAN: I think you may be right, that might be the way to go.
GB: Watching "The Dark Knight," it's very easy to imagine the Joker returning to Gotham, the way his fate remains unresolved. When you were writing the film, did you anticipate that the Joker would be back in the third film?
NOLAN: No, really and in truth, I only deal with one film at a time. I find myself sort of protesting this issue a lot. We've never attempted to save anything for a sequel or set up anything for a sequel. That seems improbable to some people because, particularly with "Batman Begins," the film ended with a particular hook [with Jim Gordon showing Batman a Joker playing card announcing the arrival of a new villain in town]. But for me that was just about the excitement of people leaving the theater with the sense that now we have the character up and running. I wanted people to walk away with that sense in their head. You know, that's he's become the Batman in the movie. That's why we had the title come up at the end, because it was "Batman Begins," and it was all very specific to that.
Then I got excited about seeing where that character would go. It was planned in advance, but it followed in that way. But we tried our hardest to really do everything in this movie that we would want to see the Joker do and to get that in the fabric of the story as much as possible. We wanted the Joker's final taunt to Batman to be that they are locked in an ongoing struggle because of Batman's rules. There's a paradox there. Batman won't kill. And the Joker is not interested in completely defeating Batman because he's fascinated by him and he enjoys sparring with him. It's trapped both of them. That was really the meaning of it. Of course what happened is Heath created the most extraordinary character that you would love to see 10 movies about. That's the bittersweet thing. It was incredible characterization. It is a bittersweet thing for all of us.
GB: After the massive, military-level operation of making "Dark Knight," is there part of you leaning toward a smaller, more nimble sort of production next?
NOLAN: On one hand, yeah, there is a certain feeling to do that. After "Batman Begins," I certainly felt like taking on something smaller, but one of the things I got such a thrill from on "The Dark Knight" was shooting on Imax and creating that massive scale and achieving that larger-than-life quality. So that's a lot of fun. I'm drawn in both directions now. So maybe what I need to do next is a very intimate, small story that happens to be photographed on a ridiculously large scale. Or vice versa [laughs].
GB: I'm not sure I even know what that means.
NOLAN: Yes, I don't know what it means either [laughter]. But really what I know is that it's about story at the end of the day. ... But I do feel there is this tug to do big scale and small scale, so I don't know. ...
GB: Maybe you need to make a small story in a huge place. "My Dinner With Andre" at the top of Mt. Everest.
NOLAN: Or in outer space. That might work.
GB: Could you see actually yourself not making the third Batman film?
NOLAN: Well ... let me think how to put this. There are two things to be said. One is the emphasis on story. What's the story? Is there a story that's going to keep me emotionally invested for the couple of years that it will take to make another one? That's the overriding question. On a more superficial level, I have to ask the question: How many good third movies in a franchise can people name? [Laughs.] At the same time, in taking on the second one, we had the challenge of trying to make a great second movie, and there haven't been too many of those either. It's all about the story really. If the story is there, everything is possible. I hope that was a suitably slippery answer.
Christopher Nolan revisits and analyzes his favorite scene in 'Dark Knight'
Source: Los Angeles Times
The "Dark Knight" director gives a deep dissection of his single favorite scene in the movie -- the gripping interrogation sequence, which (with no special effects and only bare-bones lighting) would become "the fulcrum on which the whole movie turns."
This is the second of a three-part interview with Christopher Nolan, the director of "The Dark Knight," which was released in mid-July and is now approaching $1 billion in worldwide box office. The numbers are astounding, but even more startling is the fact that the 38-year-old filmmaker captured that kind of global audience with a movie that is relentlessly dark and finds its axis in the performance of Heath Ledger as the nihilistic and sadistic Joker.
I asked the London native to pick one scene in the film that he would circle as the essential moment in the movie, either in its service to the overall story or the film's texture. He answered quickly.
Nolan: To be honest, it's pretty easy for me. The scene that is so important and so central to me is the interrogation scene between Batman and the Joker in the film. When we were writing the script, that was always one of the central set pieces that we wanted to crack.
GB: At what point in the production schedule did you shoot it?
Nolan: On the set, we shot it fairly early on. It was actually one of the first things that Heath had to do as the Joker. He told me he was actually pretty excited to tear off a big chunk early on, really get one of the Joker's key scenes up in the first three weeks of a seven-month shoot. He and I both liked the idea of just diving in, as did Christian [Bale, who portrayed Batman]. We had rehearsed the scene a tiny bit. We had just ripped through it a couple of times in pre-production just to get some slight feel of how it was going to work. Neither of them wanted to go too far with it in rehearsal. They had to rehearse some of the fight choreography, but even with that, we tried to keep it loose and improvisational. They wanted to save it all. We were all pretty excited to get on with a big chunk of dialogue and this big intense scene between these two iconic characters. It was quite bizarre to see Batman across the table across from the Joker [laughs]. I'm glad you asked this. You know, I could actually talk about this scene for hours.
We had a lot of time to shoot it too, because it was so early on. Quite often, as you get behind on other things and you run toward the end of the shoot, things can get very squeezed. But you tend to schedule the first few weeks very generously to give the crew and the actors and myself time to find our feet and find our pace. So we had a couple of days to do it.
GB: Can you give me a snapshot memory from those days shooting the scene?
Nolan: It was a great set built into a location. It had all of the advantages of feeling that we were in a real place. Nathan Crowley, the production designer, built these great mirrors and this long, tiled room that I really loved the look of; it had the feeling almost of an abattoir or something. That all fed into the brutality of the scene. We wanted to be very edgy, very brutal. We wanted it to be the point at which Batman is truly tested by the Joker and you see that the Joker is truly capable of getting under everybody's skin. I'm realizing this now about that scene — I haven't thought this through before — the synthesis of all the different elements that I'm most interested in within filmmaking all come in that scene.
The scene starts between Gary Oldman [as James Gordon] and Heath with the lights out, and [director of photography] Wally Pfister literally just lit the scene with the desk lamp, the table lamp, and nothing else. And then when the lights come on, Batman is revealed, and the rest of the scene plays out with a massive overexposure. He overexposed like five stops, I want to say, and then printed it down to bring some of the color back in. But it's this incredibly intense overhead light which let us move in any direction. We had a handheld camera and shot however we wanted, be very spontaneous.
For me creatively, that had been about inverting the expectation. We've all seen so many of these dark movie interrogation scenes where somebody is being given the third degree. We just wanted to completely flip that on its head. And have the bright, harsh, bleak light sort show you the Joker's make-up and its decay. The Batsuit was redesigned for this film. And unlike the suit that we had in "Batman Begins," it's capable of really being shown in incredible detail and still hold up to that kind of scrutiny under that bright light. The suit looked much more real and more like a functional thing this time. The whole scene was about showing something real and brutal and getting this real harshness.
GB: There's remarkable physicality of the actors in that scene. They are such different presences in the room: Christian is all dark mass and bottled fury and Heath has this spindly weirdness. ...
Nolan: Yes, and I think you start to see it even at the beginning of the scene where everything is in closer. There are tight close-ups with just a little drift to the camera. We start in a very controlled way, but even within that frame, the way Heath is bobbing in and out —and he's actually bobbing in and out of the focal plane because, you know, it's very hard to follow someone whose leaning toward camera the whole time. It actually really adds something. We're continually trying to catch him with the focus. You really see his movement back and forth. That way, even in a tight frame, you have this sense of strangeness. On the other hand, you have Batman sitting there just very, very controlled, restrained as you say. Then there's a point where it spills over into real physicality and he drags the Joker across the table. We go handheld at that point and shot the rest of the scene with handheld to be very spontaneous in its movement. They had rehearsed the stunts and the fight stuff very specifically, but we really let the actors work within that. I had never seen anybody sell a punch the way Heath was able to with Christian. I got the violence I wanted. What I felt was really important creatively for the scene was that we show Batman going too far. We show him effectively torturing someone for information because it's become personal.
Christian and I had talked a lot on "Batman Begins" about finding a moment in that film where you actually worry that Batman will go too far. A moment where his rage might spill over and he would break his rules. We never found that moment. It just wasn't there in that story. There was a lot of strength and aggression in the way he played the part, but I don't think the story provided that element of losing control. What the Joker provides in the second film is the fact that his entire motivation is to push people's buttons and find their rules set and it turn it on itself. And Batman of course places such importance on his rules, his morals. It's what distinguishes him, in his mind, from a common vigilante. The Joker is able to twist him around and make him question his own approach and his own actions.
GB: In the first film, the Batman's most memorable moments of intense aggression feel more like theater — he's doing it in a calculated show to scare people. The first movie seems to be about Batman's fear; the second one is about his rage.
Nolan: Exactly. That's why we never found that moment of danger, the one we had talked about, where there's this danger that Batman will just lose it and go too far. That rage is very much a central part of the story in 'The Dark Knight,' and that interrogation scene is the fulcrum on which the whole movie turns. I think Batman finds out — and Bruce Wayne finds out — a lot about himself in that scene. I was just delighted to get to see Christian show that rage. And it's wonderfully balanced with Gary's control as well. Even though everyone remembers the scene as being the Joker and Batman, Gordon played a very important part to setting it up and allowing this interrogation to happen. And then as he is watching from the sideline, he sees the exact point where this is going too far. He knows Batman well enough to observe this, to recognize it. He tries to get in, but Batman has locked the door. And what we get to lead to, by the end of the scene, when he's just pounding on the Joker, I think Heath managed to find the exact essence of the threat of the Joker and who he is: He's being pounded in the face and he's laughing and loving it. There's nothing you can do. As he tells Batman, "You have nothing to do with all of your strength." There's this sort of impotence of the strong and the armored and the very muscular Batman; he's very powerful, but there's no useful way for this power to be exercised in this scene. He has to confront that.
Originally, at the end of that scene, once the Joker reveals his information, Christian dropped him and then, almost as an afterthought, he kicked him in the head as he walked out of the room. We wound up removing that bit. It seemed a little too petulant for Batman in a way. And really, more than that, what it was is that I liked how Christian played it: When he drops the Joker, he has realized the futility of what he's done. You see it in his eyes. How do you fight someone who thrives on conflict? It's a very loose end to be left with.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Nolan says his Batman doesn't play well with others
Source: Los Angeles Times
The director of "The Dark Knight" talks about the problems with teaming up Batman with other superheroes and also discusses the potential for an Oscar nomination for the late Heath Ledger.
This is the final installment of a three-part interview with Christopher Nolan, director of "The Dark Knight," the second-highest-grossing film in history and, by many accounts, the best superhero adaptation ever. But the London native has also shown a flair for intricate and sophisticated thrillers ("Memento," "The Prestige" and "Insomnia"), and in today's interview he makes it clear that he sees his Batman character as being separate and apart from the crowded superhero cinema of today.
GB: Chris, this summer, "Iron Man" and "The Incredible Hulk" signaled the true start of the "crossover era" in comic-book films with Marvel Studios putting an emphasis on the fact that their heroes coexist in the same world. DC and Warner Bros. may embrace a similar strategy, especially if the Justice League film project is revived. Does that concern you? Your Gotham doesn't seem suited to that.
Nolan: I don't think our Batman, our Gotham, lends itself to that kind of cross-fertilization. It goes back to one of the first things we wrangled with when we first started putting the story together: Is this a world in which comic books already exist? Is this a world in which superheroes already exist? If you think of "Batman Begins" and you think of the philosophy of this character trying to reinvent himself as a symbol, we took the position -- we didn't address it directly in the film, but we did take the position philosophically -- that superheroes simply don't exist. If they did, if Bruce knew of Superman or even of comic books, then that's a completely different decision that he's making when he puts on a costume in an attempt to become a symbol. It's a paradox and a conundrum, but what we did is go back to the very original concept and idea of the character. In his first appearances, he invents himself as a totally original creation.
GB: That doesn't lend itselt to having him swing on a rope across the Metropolis skyline.
Nolan: No, correct, it's a different universe. It's a different way of looking at it. Now, it's been done successfully, very successfully, in the comics so I don't dispute it as an approach. It just isn't the approach we took. We had to make a decision for "Batman Begins."
GB: A different path...
Nolan: Yes, completely different. It would have given a very, very different meaning to what Bruce Wayne was leaving home to do and coming back home to do and putting on the costume for and all the rest. We dealt with on its own terms: What does Batman mean to Bruce Wayne, what is he trying to achieve? He has not been influenced by other superheroes. Of course, you see what we're able to do with Joker in this film is that he is able to be quite theatrical because we set up Batman as an example of intense theatricality in Gotham. It starts to grow outward from Batman. But the premise we began with is that Batman was creating a wholly original thing. To be honest, we went even further than the comics on this point. I can't remember at what point in the comics history the idea came about that he was a fan of Zorro as a kid. I haven't researched that, but I don't believe it goes back terribly far."
GB: I remember the movie-theater marquee with a Zorro film in Frank Miller's "The Dark Knight Returns" in 1986. ...
Nolan: It definitely goes back before that. I'm pretty sure. I'll have to ask [DC Comics President] Paul Levitz about it, but my sense is that it does go back further ... but either way, we changed it. We didn't have young Bruce going to see Zorro because a character in a movie watching a movie is very different than a character in a comic book watching a movie. A comic-book character reading a comic book is more analogous to a character in a movie watching a movie. It creates a deconstructionist thing that we were trying to avoid. That was one reason. But another reason was to remove Zorro as a role model. We wanted nothing that would undermine the idea that Bruce came up with this crazy plan of putting on a mask all by himself. That allowed us to treat it on our own terms. So we replaced the Zorro idea with the bats to cement that idea of fear and symbolism associated with bats.
GB: Which you did by putting Bruce and his parents in the opera house watching "Die Fledermaus," which also gave you an opportunity to enhance the operatic feel of the film.
Nolan: Precisely. That took us into that very realm that seemed to work on screen.
GB: You've said you aren't sure what you next project will be. But clearly Warner Bros. looks at Batman as a core part of their movie business, perhaps now more than ever, and there are marketplace pressures on them to schedule the next installment of the franchise. Are you getting a lot of pressure to make a decision?
Nolan: They're being extremely gracious. I have a very good relationship with the studio. They know that I really needed to go on holiday and take some time to figure what I want to do next. They've been very respectful of that, which is terrific and one of the reasons I enjoy working with Warner Bros.
GB: The nominations for the 81st Academy Awards will be announced in January. How meaningful would it be for the cast and crew of "The Dark Knight" if the late Heath Ledger is nominated for best supporting actor?
Nolan: I think the thing that has always been important to me in light of Heath's death is the responsibility I've felt to his work. The responsibility of crafting the film in such a way that his performance came across the way he intended. Clearly, that has been the case. That's one of the reasons I take such pride in the film.
I felt a great wave of relief, really, as people first started to see the performance and it was clear that they were getting the performance. It's easy to forget with everything that's happened what an enormous challenge it was for Heath to take on this iconic role. He rose to that challenge so admirably that any expression of people being excited or moved by his performance is a wonderful thing. Whatever form that takes. People coming to see his performance and getting it. It's been extremely satisfying for all of us already. Anything that adds to that would be wonderful.
Academy disqualifies 'Dark' score
Music cue sheet lists five names as composers
Source: Variety
The score for "The Dark Knight" has been disqualified by the executive committee of the Academy music branch.
Formal letters to that effect are expected to go out this week to composers Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard, who collaborated on the music.
Their previous collaboration, on "Batman Begins," was similarly disqualified in 2005.
Sources inside the committee said that the big issue was the fact that five names were listed as composers on the music cue sheet, the official studio document that specifies every piece of music (along with its duration and copyright owner) in the film.
Zimmer said, in an interview with Variety prior to this week's Acad action, that listing multiple names on the cue sheet was a way of financially rewarding parts of the music team who helped make the overall work successful. (Performing-rights societies like ASCAP and BMI use the cue sheet to distribute royalties to composers.)
Zimmer, Howard and the other three individuals -- music editor Alex Gibson, ambient music designer Mel Wesson and composer Lorne Balfe -- reportedly signed an affidavit stating that the score was primarily the work of Zimmer and Howard.
That apparently wasn't enough for the majority of the committee, which was also supplied with documentation indicating that more than 60%, but less than 70%, of the score was credited to Zimmer and Howard.
The "Dark Knight" score -- and the whole issue of multiple-composer collaboration, which is on the rise in Hollywood these days -- has occupied about four hours of discussion over the past two executive committee meetings.
Some members sided with Zimmer and Howard; citing the originality and cutting-edge nature of the music, they urged others to keep the "Dark Knight" score eligible despite the cue-sheet issue.
Both Zimmer and Howard declined comment on the ruling. Both are seven-time nominees; Zimmer won for "The Lion King."
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia2.firstshowing.net%2Ffirstshowing%2FTDK-variety-FYC-ads-Joker-lg.jpg&hash=7ee1c2e0d1604b7eae491d27ae497c752ae10cc0)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia2.firstshowing.net%2Ffirstshowing%2FTDK-variety-FYC-ads-Picture-lg.jpg&hash=7a0bde1f85427527a1160155a0cc33b2a3a23341)
Warner to re-release 'Knight' Jan. 23
Film could become fourth to gross over $1 bil
Source: Variety
Warner Bros. will re-release "The Dark Knight" on Jan. 23 in a nationwide launch, guaranteeing that it will become the fourth film to take in more than $1 billion in worldwide box office.
"Knight" has cumed $530.3 million domestically and $465.9 million internationally, leaving it less than $4 million short of the billion-dollar milestone. Only "Titanic," "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" and "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest" have topped that mark.
"Knight" also is the second-highest domestic grosser of all time, trailing only "Titanic."
The re-release will come six weeks after the DVD launch of "Knight," set for Tuesday.
Dan Fellman, president of Warner's domestic distribution, made the announcement Thursday. "We wanted to provide one more opportunity for moviegoers to experience it on the bigscreen as it was meant to be seen," he added.
As Best Buy, if you buy the two disc or the blu-ray special editions, it comes with a Joker or Batman mask:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bestbuy.ca%2Fmultimedia%2Fproducts%2Flarge%2Fdvd2159305_right.jpg&hash=9594fbd54967fdfccbbe9098fd84d9605b38e06b)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi255.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fhh157%2Fbravestime%2FTDK.jpg&hash=386b024644d445420d8ab1aa954ee7026dc7e45b)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.bestbuy.com%2FBestBuy_US%2Fen_US%2Fimages%2Fmusicmoviegame%2Fpdpimages%2F9137383.jpg&hash=6ff3a4b81bc1848356f0a4f62733ba21af970e7e)
At Circuit City, there is alternative cover with bonus journal:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg242.imageshack.us%2Fimg242%2F5481%2Fcircuitcityho5.jpg&hash=b84738b288a67c98439c703b5469bc99b484324e)
Target looks to have a Batman mask, similar to this:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fecx.images-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FI%2F51YTDKd6jkL._SS400_.jpg&hash=5c6f9ec6e7dc5e7cfe22470f9ffb6d797bef3fa3)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fecx.images-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FI%2F41YD1itUk7L._SS400_.jpg&hash=ace59e872af88c03f3c2b24453658699bd115e98)
attention members and students, this is also screening at MOMA... monday at 8:15.
'Dark Knight' director Nolan illuminates four scenes
By Scott Bowles, USA TODAY
The Dark Knight, out on DVD ($29 or $35) and Blu-ray ($36 or $65) Tuesday, is one of the most anticipated titles of the year. Knight director Christopher Nolan invited USA TODAY's Scott Bowles to his home office, where he edited the film, to explain some of his favorite scenes.
The bank is robbed
The story: The sequence is one of four that Nolan shot on IMAX, and he filmed it two weeks before principal photography began. "We wanted to see how much we could do on IMAX, how elaborate we could go," Nolan says. "Essentially, it was a test to see if we'd driven over the cliff."
Turns out, "there really wasn't anything we couldn't do," he says. "You can only shoot for 2½ minutes on that big IMAX film, so our takes were pretty short. But it was a great way to let Heath warm up."
Look for: Two gangsters hurtling between two Chicago high-rise buildings. Like most of the stunts and explosions in Knight, there is minimal computer-generated magic. "Those guys really were on that wire," Nolan says. "That's not a green screen. I'm not comfortable that high up, but they really got into it."
The story:Knight co-writer Jonathan Nolan (Christopher's brother) came up with the idea for the Joker to make a pencil disappear — by slamming a mobster's skull onto it. Then the Joker leaves his calling card.
"When Jonathan wrote it, I didn't really see it working," Nolan says.
But when Ledger got the script, "he insisted we keep the scene," Nolan says. "And I realized it was all in how Heath performed the lines. It's so creepy and brutal, without a drop of blood. Now I can't think of it not being in there."
Look for: How the pencil disappears. Filmmakers considered using a computer-generated pencil. For a few takes, Nolan hid behind the table and snatched the pencil before the thug's head hits it. Ultimately, the stunt man simply grabbed the pencil himself just before his face gets planted.
Batman confronts Joker
The story: This was the first scene Christian Bale and Heath Ledger had together, and Nolan considers the scene the linchpin of the film.
"It establishes exactly who they are," he says. "You see just how crazy the Joker is and just how similar Batman is to him."
Nolan says some actors prefer to save the climactic scenes midway through filming, or toward the end. "Not Christian and Heath. They were really looking forward to this one," he says.
"I think we all knew that if this scene worked, the rest of the movie would, too."
Look for: A bloodless beating. Nolan had fake blood ready to smear on Ledger's face after Batman roughs up the Joker.
"But we decided it worked better to pull back some," Nolan says. "His makeup is so smeared and frightening, particularly in that lighting, that putting blood on his face would be over the top."
The hospital explodes
The story: Before Nolan began shooting, he promised himself "to blow up more things than any director had before." So when he heard that an old Brach's candy factory was to be demolished, he asked Chicago officials if they would let him decorate it like a Gotham General Hospital first.
Film crews set small explosives in the building to blow out a few prop windows and doors to signal demolition experts to detonate the actual building.
That really is Heath Ledger standing outside the building. "He was always a safe distance, but it was still pretty close," Nolan says. "He had caulk in his hair after the explosion."
Look for: A thumbs-up. A safety engineer can be spotted in the back of the Joker's getaway bus signaling to the driver that Ledger was safely inside. "We left it in," Nolan says. "We figured that could have been one of the Joker's henchmen. And I liked the reality of the whole scene."
PLEASE STOP
Quote from: FrunLg on December 08, 2008, 09:06:32 PM
I TAKE MY DESIRES FOR REALITY BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN THE REALITY OF MY DESIRES
STEFEN, PLEASE TAKE CARE OF THIS...
I'm not touching that fucker.
He's batshit crazy.
Well, I'm outta ideas. :ponder:
The Blu-Ray looks BEAUTIFUL. It switches between filling the screen and letterbox, so it recreates what it was like seeing it in IMAX. Upon hearing that, I thought it would be distracting, but it really doesn't get in the way, probably because the film is so engrossing. The True HD is a joy too. I think my neighbors are mad at me thinking that I'd blowing up the complex.
What are you watching it on? What kind of television?
Quote from: Stefen on December 09, 2008, 05:49:29 PM
What are you watching it on? What kind of television?
Mitsubishi 72" - Model 73727
http://xixax.com/index.php?topic=440.msg248484#msg248484
Wow. Sweet setup. If I had that setup, I'd never leave the house.
'The Dark Knight' DVD is selling at brisk pace
Nearly 3 million copies of Warner Bros.' summer blockbuster are purchased on the first day of its home video release in the U.S., Canada and Britain.
The major promotion push behind the DVD release of Warner Bros.' summer blockbuster, "The Dark Knight," appears to have worked -- at least out of the gate.
The film, which brought in $530 million in ticket sales in the United States, sold nearly 3 million copies Tuesday, the first day of its DVD release in the U.S., Canada and Britain.
"The Dark Knight's" retail reception is reminiscent of strong first-day sales for "The Matrix" and "Titanic" (any debut of 1 million or more units is considered a home run). At the present rate, "Dark Knight" looks to be on pace to catch Paramount Pictures' "Iron Man," which sold 7.2 million units in its first week on store shelves this year.
Hollywood has been anxiously watching home video sales as the recession deepens because they are a major profit center for the studios. Nielsen VideoScan estimates that home video sales are off 5.2% this year as several movies that did well at the box office didn't sell as well as expected on DVD.
The studios have been hoping that the new Blu-ray high-definition format will help to spur the sluggish DVD market. As many as 25% to 30% of the "Dark Knight" discs sold -- or 600,000 copies -- were purchased in the Blu-ray format. That surpasses the previous record set by "Iron Man," which sold 260,000 Blu-ray discs upon its first day of release.
Studio executives say it's a sign that the format, which has been slow to take off, is gaining traction with consumers.
"It's encouraging," said Ron Sanders, president of Warner Home Video. "The Blu-ray sales of 'Dark Knight' were exceptionally strong and much higher than our projections."
By some estimates, DVD and Blu-ray disc sales outperformed other retail categories. While overall retail spending on Black Friday was up 3% compared with a year ago, home video sales rose 15%, according to DEG: The Digital Entertainment Group, an industry-supported trade group (DEG bases its estimates on surveys of retailers, studios and industry data providers).
But Nielsen VideoScan offered a more bleak assessment of Thanksgiving week, reporting that home video sales fell 8.2% compared with a year ago. However, Nielsen's data don't include sales from Wal-Mart Stores Inc., which by some accounts represents 40% of the DVD market.
Retailers did brisk business in Blu-ray players. Researcher NPD Group reported that retailers sold 150,000 players, a 300% increase from a year ago, when two incompatible high-definition disc formats were duking it out for supremacy.
Blu-ray received a huge boost from Wal-Mart, which reportedly sold out of Magnavox players priced at $128.
Did anyone else "attend" the Blu-Ray viewing of TDK tonight with Nolan? It was the first event done through BD-Live and you basically watched the movie while Nolan answered questions (in text form) from viewers. It was a novel idea but most of the "questions" consisted of someone saying how much they liked such and such actor and why were they chosen for the role or how much they liked when so and so did so and so and who's idea was that. Not to mention that most of the questions asked were already answered in the bonus features. The coolest part was when some guy proposed to his girlfriend and when Nolan paused the movie to go pee. He refused to answer a question about who the 5 people Dent killed were, but said he would answer at a later time...intriguing. He also said Two-Face is dead.
Del Toro did that for Hellboy II.
No 'Knight' in Bangkok: Batman won't land in China
HONG KONG - Just because Batman landed in Hong Kong doesn't mean " The Dark Knight " will.
Warner Bros. decided not to release the film in China — or even submit it for censors' approval — because of "prerelease conditions" and "cultural sensitivities," the studio said Tuesday.
Warner Bros . officials may have been concerned the film — particularly scenes shot in Hong Kong , where Batman nabs a gangster — would offend censors. Hong Kong is a Chinese-ruled former British colony that maintains separate political and economic systems .
Another possible sticking point is a brief appearance by Hong Kong actor-singer Edison Chen , who appeared in lurid photos with several women this year.
Bootleg copies have been available in Chinese markets for months.
i've watched this on blu-ray a few times, and the first 3/4 is so good, but it really falls apart when two-face and his absurd transformation come into play. the beginning of the end is that completely unconvincing and swallow speech by the joker in the hospital and it's all downhill from there. i can't believe you introduce a character as cool as the joker and then give the ending of the film to the other villian that was introduced 20 minutes prior...and in a climatic scene as lame as that. and that ferry scene is comically bad. i mean, really, really awful.
ledger's performance is so far above the rest of the film it's almost distracting.
Quote from: abuck1220 on December 29, 2008, 04:05:28 PM
i've watched this on blu-ray a few times, and the first 3/4 is so good, but it really falls apart when two-face and his absurd transformation come into play. the beginning of the end is that completely unconvincing and swallow speech by the joker in the hospital and it's all downhill from there. i can't believe you introduce a character as cool as the joker and then give the ending of the film to the other villian that was introduced 20 minutes prior...and in a climatic scene as lame as that. and that ferry scene is comically bad. i mean, really, really awful.
ledger's performance is so far above the rest of the film it's almost distracting.
I couldn't agree more. It really falls apart at the hospital scene. At that point, it's really all over the place and can't seem to get ahold of itself. It's absolutely flawless up until then.
Quote from: abuck1220 on December 29, 2008, 04:05:28 PM
i've watched this on blu-ray a few times, and the first 3/4 is so good, but it really falls apart when two-face and his absurd transformation come into play. the beginning of the end is that completely unconvincing and swallow speech by the joker in the hospital and it's all downhill from there. i can't believe you introduce a character as cool as the joker and then give the ending of the film to the other villian that was introduced 20 minutes prior...and in a climatic scene as lame as that. and that ferry scene is comically bad. i mean, really, really awful.
I finally saw this one yesterday and I completely agree with this. At the end of the film I was scratching my head.
I was feeling like Bukowski in the first 40 seconds of this vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1e5Jeh2Fk0&feature=related
The Dark Knight Re-Release IMAX Locations
Source: IMAX Corporation
A friendly reminder to all the fans of the The Dark Knight that the movie returns to theaters on Friday. Here is the official IMAX press release and worldwide locations:
IMAX Corporation and Warner Bros. Pictures today announced that the box office smash hit The Dark Knight, which has grossed more than $997 million at the worldwide box office since its release on July 18th, 2008, will return to IMAX® theatres for an encore presentation. Starting January 23rd, the film will open in 143 IMAX screens domestically, and 29 screens internationally. Last year the film opened day and date in 94 domestic and 15 international IMAX theatres and went on to become the highest grossing live-action Hollywood IMAX release, generating $63 million as it continued to be released throughout the IMAX network.
The Dark Knight: The IMAX Experience features six sequences filmed with IMAX cameras, which marks the first time ever that a major feature film has been even partially shot using IMAX cameras.
"The Dark Knight is a crowning achievement in every sense of the word," said Dan Fellman, President of Domestic Distribution, Warner Bros. Pictures. "We want to provide one more opportunity for moviegoers to experience it on the big screen as it was meant to be seen. We're also very excited to give more fans in new markets an opportunity to experience the film in this special way, thanks to the continued rapid growth of the IMAX theatre network."
"As audiences discovered over the summer, The Dark Knight is not only a phenomenal film, but an extraordinarily unique experience in IMAX," said Veronika Kwan-Rubinek, President of International Distribution, Warner Bros. Pictures. "With the multitude of accolades it has received this season, we wanted to bring this amazing film back to theaters to give audiences another chance to see it on the big screen and in the expanded IMAX locations around the globe."
"We are grateful to Chris Nolan and Warner Bros Pictures for incorporating IMAX into such a wonderful cinematic masterpiece, and we're honored to bring it back to our theatres," said Greg Foster, Chairman and President of IMAX Filmed Entertainment. "The anticipation surrounding the initial IMAX release reached beyond the markets where we had IMAX theatres and we're delighted that moviegoers in many of those markets will now have the chance to Experience it in IMAX."
One of the most celebrated and successful films of this or any year, The Dark Knight has been hailed by both critics and audiences since its original release last July. The film garnered widespread acclaim for its artistic and technical achievements, culminating with the film being named on more than 150 critics' lists of the year's top-ten films.
In addition, the filmmakers behind The Dark Knight have been honored by their peers, with Christopher Nolan receiving a Directors Guild of America Award nomination; producers Nolan, Charles Roven and Emma Thomas garnering a Producers Guild Award nomination; and a Writers Guild of America Award nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay going to Chris Nolan, Jonathan Nolan and David S. Goyer. Cast member Heath Ledger received a Screen Actors Guild Award nomination, and has also won a Golden Globe, Critics' Choice Award and numerous other critics groups' awards for Best Supporting Actor.
The Dark Knight also won the Critics' Choice Award for Best Action Film, and swept the People's Choice Awards in five categories, including Favorite Movie and Favorite Cast.
The Dark Knight: The IMAX Experience is scheduled to play at the following locations starting on January 23rd.
UNITED STATES
Arizona
Mesa - Gateway 12 IMAX Theatre
Phoenix - AMC Deer Valley 30 with IMAX
Tempe - IMAX Theatre at Arizona Mills
Arkansas
Little Rock - Chenal 9 IMAX Theatre
California
Anaheim - The Movie Experience 14 at Anaheim Gardenwalk
Arcadia - AMC Santa Anita 16 & IMAX
Burbank - AMC Burbank 16 & IMAX
Cathedral City - Desert IMAX Theatre
Dublin - Regal Hacienda Crossings Stadium 21 & IMAX
Emeryville - AMC Bay Street 16 & IMAX
Fresno - Edwards Fresno Stadium 22 & IMAX
Irvine - Edwards Irvine Spectrum IMAX
Los Angeles - AMC Century City 15 & IMAX
Los Angeles - AMC Universal CityWalk Stadium 19 with IMAX
Los Angeles - IMAX Theatre at The Bridge: cinema de lux
Monterey - Cannery Row IMAX Theatre
Ontario - Edwards Ontario Palace 22 & IMAX
Sacramento - Edwards Fairfield Stadium 16 & IMAX
Sacramento - Esquire IMAX Theatre
Sacramento - Regal Cinemas El Dorado Hills Stadium 14 & IMAX
San Diego - Mira Mesa Stadium 18 & IMAX
San Jose - AMC Eastridge Mall 15 & IMAX
San Francisco - AMC Loews Metreon 16 with IMAX
Simi Valley - Civic Center Stadium 16 & IMAX
Stockton - Regal City Centre Stadium 16 & IMAX
Torrance - AMC Del Amo 18 & IMAX
Colorado
Colorado Springs - Cinemark Carefree Circle IMAX Theatre
Denver - UA Colorado Center Stadium 9 & IMAX
Westminster - AMC Orchards of Westminster 12 & IMAX
Connecticut
Manchester - IMAX Theatre at Showcase Cinemas Buckland Hills
Norwalk - IMAX Theatre at The Maritime Aquarium
Florida
Altamonte Springs - AMC Altamonte Mall 18 & IMAX
Aventura - AMC Aventura 24 & IMAX
Fort Lauderdale - AutoNation® IMAX® Theater at Museum of Discovery
and Science
Fort Myers - Regal Gulf Coast Town Center Stadium 16 & IMAX
Jacksonville - AMC Regency 24 & IMAX
Orange Park - AMC Orange Park 24 & IMAX
Orlando - Pointe Orlando 20 & IMAX
St. Augustine - World Golf Hall of Fame IMAX Theatre
St. Petersburg - Muvico Baywalk 20 & IMAX
Tallahassee - IMAX Theatre at the Challenger Learning Center
Tampa - AMC Veterans 24 & IMAX
Tampa - Channelside Cinemas IMAX
Tampa - IMAX Dome Theatre at MOSI
West Palm Beach - Muvico Parisian 20 & IMAX
Georgia
Augusta - Augusta Exchange Stadium 20 & IMAX
Buford - Regal Mall of Georgia Stadium 20 & IMAX
Idaho
Boise - Edwards Boise Stadium 22 & IMAX
Illinois
Batavia - Randall 15 IMAX
Chicago - Navy Pier IMAX Theatre
Lincolnshire - Regal Lincolnshire 20 & IMAX
Woodridge - Cinemark Seven Bridges IMAX Theatre
Indiana
Evansville - IMAX Theatre at Showplace Cinemas East 18
Indianapolis - IMAX Theatre at the Indiana State Museum
Indianapolis - Kerasotes ShowPlace 16 & IMAX
Noblesville - Hamilton Towne Center 16 + IMAX
Portage - Portage 16 IMAX
Iowa
Davenport - Putnam Museum and IMAX Theatre
Des Moines - Science Center of Iowa & Blank IMAX Dome Theater
Kansas
Olathe - AMC Studio 30 & IMAX
Kentucky
Louisville - IMAX Cinema De Lux 20: Stonybrook
Louisiana
Harahan - AMC Elmwood Palace 20 & IMAX
New Orleans - Entergy IMAX Theatre, Audubon Aquarium of the Americas
Maryland
Baltimore - AMC Loews White Marsh 16 & IMAX
Columbia - AMC Columbia 14 & IMAX
Massachusetts
Boston - New England Aquarium's Simons IMAX Theatre
Natick - Verizon IMAX 3D Theater at Jordan's Furniture - Natick
Reading - Verizon IMAX 3D Theater at Jordan's Furniture - Reading
Michigan
Dearborn - The Henry Ford IMAX Theatre
Grand Blanc - NGC Trillium Cinema IMAX Theatre
Grand Rapids - Celebration! Cinema IMAX Theatre
Lansing - Celebration! Cinema IMAX Theatre
Sterling Heights - AMC Forum 30 & IMAX
Ypsilanti - Showcase Cinemas Ann Arbor IMAX
Minnesota
Apple Valley - Great Clips IMAX Theatre
Missouri
Kansas City - AMC BarryWoods 24 & IMAX
St. Louis - Wehrenberg Theatres Ronnies 20 Cine IMAX
Nevada
Las Vegas - Brenden Theatres and IMAX at the Palms Casino Resort
Las Vegas - Regal Red Rock Stadium 16 & IMAX
Las Vegas - Regal Aliante Stadium 16 & IMAX
New Hampshire
Hooksett - Cinemagic IMAX Theatre
New Jersey
Atlantic City -Tropicana Casino and Resort IMAX Theatre
Cherry Hill - AMC Loews Cherry Hill 24 & IMAX
Hamilton - AMC Hamilton 24 & IMAX
New York
Albany - Regal Crossgates Mall 18 & IMAX
Deer Park - Regal Deer Park Stadium 16 & IMAX
Garden City - Grumman IMAX at Cradle of Aviation
New Rochelle - Regal New Roc City 18 & IMAX
New York City - AMC Loews Lincoln Square 13 & IMAX
New York City - AMC Empire 25 & IMAX
Rochester - Cinemark IMAX Theatre at Tinseltown USA
West Nyack - IMAX Theatre at Palisades Center
White Plains - IMAX Theatre at City Center: Cinema De Lux 15
Williamsville - Regal Transit Center 18 & IMAX
North Carolina
Raleigh - Wachovia IMAX Theatre at Marbles Kids Museum
Ohio
Springdale - IMAX Theatre at Springdale 18: Cinema De Lux
Columbus - AMC Easton Town Center 30 & IMAX
Oklahoma
Tulsa - Cinemark IMAX Theatre at the Tulsa
Oregon
Tigard - Regal Bridgeport Village Stadium 18 & IMAX
Pennsylvania
Bensalem - AMC Neshaminy 24 & IMAX
Harrisburg - Select Medical IMAX Theater at The Whitaker Center
Homestead - AMC Waterfront 22 & IMAX
King of Prussia - UA King of Prussia Stadium 16 & IMAX
Philadelphia - Tuttleman IMAX Theatre at the Franklin Institute
Reading - RC Reading Movies 11 & IMAX
Tarentum - Cinemark IMAX Theatre at the Galleria Pittsburgh Mills
Rhode Island
Providence - Providence Place Cinemas 16 & IMAX
Tennessee
Knoxville - Regal Pinnacle Stadium 18 & IMAX
Nashville - Regal Opry Mills 20 & IMAX
Texas
Austin - The Bob Bullock Texas State History Museum IMAX Theatre
Colleyville - Colleyville Cinema & Grille IMAX Theatre
Dallas - Cinemark IMAX Theatre at Cinemark 17
Fort Worth - Fort Worth Museum Omni Theater
Houston - AMC Gulf Pointe 30 & IMAX
Houston - Edwards Houston Marq*E 23 & IMAX
San Antonio - Santikos Palladium 18 IMAX Theatre
Sugar Land - AMC First Colony 24 & IMAX
Tomball - Santikos Silverado Station 18 IMAX
Utah
Sandy - Megaplex 17 IMAX at Jordan Commons
Virginia
Alexandria - AMC Hoffman Center 22 & IMAX
Chantilly - Airbus IMAX Theater at Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center
Hampton - Riverside IMAX Theater at the Virginia Air & Space Center
Virginia Beach - AMC Lynnhaven 18 & IMAX
Woodbridge - AMC Potomac Mills 18 & IMAX
Washington
Lacey - Regal Martin Village Stadium 16 & IMAX
Seattle - Pacific Science Center Boeing IMAX Theatre
Spokane - Riverfront Park IMAX
Tukwila - AMC Southcenter 16 & IMAX
Washington DC
Washington DC - Samuel C. Johnson IMAX Theater at the National Museum of
Nat. History
Wisconsin
Fitchburg - Kerasotes Star 18 & IMAX
CANADA
Alberta
Calgary - Cineplex Scotiabank Theatre Chinook IMAX Theatre
Edmonton - Cineplex Scotiabank West Edmonton Mall IMAX Theatre
British Columbia
Langley - Cineplex Colossus Langley IMAX Theatre
Richmond - Cineplex SilverCity Riverport IMAX Theatre
Vancouver - CN Theatre at Canada Place
Manitoba
Winnipeg - IMAX Theatre at Portage Place
Nova Scotia
Halifax - Empire IMAX, Bayer's Lake
Ontario
Mississauga - Cineplex Coliseum Mississauga IMAX Theatre
Ottawa - Cineplex SilverCity Gloucester IMAX Theatre
Toronto - Cineplex Scotiabank Theatre Toronto IMAX Theatre
Woodbridge - Cineplex Colossus Woodbridge IMAX Theatre
Quebec
Montreal - Cineplex Scotiabank Theatre Montreal IMAX Theatre
Quebec City - IMAX le Theatre
INTERNATIONAL
Argentina
Buenos Aires - IMAX Center Norte
Australia
Melbourne - Hoyts Highpoint IMAX
Melbourne - IMAX Theatre, Melbourne Museum
Perth - Hoyts Carousel IMAX
Sydney - Hoyts Entertainment Quarter IMAX
Sydney - LG IMAX Theatre
Brazil
Sao Paolo - Unibanco IMAX Cinema
China
Hong Kong - UA MegaBox IMAX Theatre
Columbia
Bogota - IMAX Theatre Plaza de las Americas
Ecuador
Guayaquil - Fundacion Malecon 2000
Guatemala
Guatemala City - Pradera Concepcion
Korea
Goyangsi - CGV Ilsan
Seoul - CGV Wangsipni
Seoul - CGV Yongsan
Mexico
Guadalajara - Cinepolis Galerias Guadalajara IMAX Theatre
Mexico City - Cinepolis Perisur IMAX Theatre
Mexico City - Cinepolis Universidad IMAX Theatre
Monterrey - Cinepolis Galerias Valle Oriente IMAX Theatre
Toluca - Cinepolis Galerias Metepec IMAX Theatre
Netherlands
Amsterdam - Pathe Arena IMAX
Philippines
Manila - San Miguel Coca-Cola IMAX Theatre
Taiwan
Taipei - Samsung IMAX Miramar Cinemas
United Kingdom
Birmingham - IMAX Theatre at Millennium Point
Bradford - IMAX National Media Museum
Glasgow - Glasgow Science Centre IMAX Cinema
Greenwich - Odeon Greenwich IMAX
London - BFI London IMAX Cinema
Manchester - Odeon IMAX Cinema Manchester at The Printworks
Wimbledon - Odeon Wimbledon
Thanks for the reminder, mac.
the only proper way to see this film.
Q&A: Christopher Nolan
It wouldn't be wrong to label Christopher Nolan an auteur, given the distinct dramatic touch he's displayed from 1998's ultra-low-budget "Following" to last year's mega-million-dollar "The Dark Knight." But Nolan -- who's being honored with the American Society of Cinematographers' Board of Governors Award at the ASC Outstanding Achievement Awards on Sunday -- didn't develop his cinematic signature in a vacuum. As Todd Longwell discovered when he spoke to the writer-director-producer for The Hollywood Reporter, Nolan has worked with a tight team of collaborators including cinematographer Wally Pfister and production designer Nathan Crowley, often experimenting in Nolan's garage.
The Hollywood Reporter: Your preproduction headquarters is in your garage. You do camera tests in your backyard. Do you have an aversion to the studio environment?
Christopher Nolan: "Batman Begins" (2005) was the first film where we did (that), and it was the result of trying to find a way to keep the spontaneous, intimate creative process of smaller projects while going into, by far, the biggest project we'd taken on.
THR: Is it a glorified shed with oil spots on the floor or a well-appointed office?
Nolan: When we first started, it was literally a garage with a washing machine in there and all that. I'd just pull the car out and put a desk in. I've had it done up a bit nicer since then because we actually edited "The Dark Knight" in there as well, so it's become multi-purpose.
THR: You've been very faithful to your collaborators. You've used Pfister since 2000's "Memento" and Crowley since 2002's "Insomnia." Your wife Emma Thomas is your producer and your brother Jonathan Nolan is your writing partner.
Nolan: It makes it much easier and quicker to communicate with your team. It also allows for a freer exchange of ideas with less defensiveness from myself, from my other collaborators. You're not fighting your corner so much; you're actually just trying to all contribute to the pool of ideas.
THR: Did you draw on other visual artists for inspiration for the look of "The Dark Knight"?
Nolan: As you try to communicate what's in your head to your team, you give them certain touchstones. For the makeup for the Joker, for example, I showed John Caglione, the makeup artist, Francis Bacon's paintings with a sort of smeared quality in the faces. With Wally and Nathan, I talked a lot about Michael Mann's films -- "Heat" (1995), in particular, in terms of its use of architecture and modernism and the way in which he was able to make a city seem like a playground for the characters.
THR: Did you plot a character arc for the color or the darkness in the film?
Nolan: I had certain notions, but I also like to just let Wally sit with the script and see what he comes up with. The one thing I did continually try to push or just put in the back of his mind is, if Batman only comes out at night, in this film daylight becomes more threatening, because the day belongs to the Joker. So at various points in the film, things you would expect to be dark are actually bright or in the middle of the day. In particular, the interrogation scenes -- which I was very pleased with the way Wally shot. We started out very dark and then turned the lights on as bright as possible to try to invert the usual dynamic of the use of light and dark in a noirish film. Because Batman lives in the shadows, but he's the hero.
Quote from: abuck1220 on December 29, 2008, 04:05:28 PM
ledger's performance is so far above the rest of the film it's almost distracting.
Or vice versa.
Quote from: Madonna is a stupid bitch on April 25, 2008, 03:33:54 AM
Looks like Batman had an assignment for Project Mayhem.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvMEBsHmxhE
That was pretty fucking awesome. HBO made me want to watch it. I think I'll download it right now.
hehe, stefen you wild man. Thats the second time I've seen it and I'm even more impressed.
that promo almost made me forget how much this movie sucked.
Quote from: abuck1220 on June 10, 2009, 09:08:17 AM
that promo almost made me forget how much sucked.
If by this movie you mean the last half-hour, then I agree.
Quote from: abuck1220 on June 10, 2009, 09:08:17 AM
that promo almost made me forget how much this movie sucked.
guess what? turns out YOU suck.
I found this interesting:
Jim Emerson's shot by shot analysis of a major chase scene in 'The Dark Knight'
http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/2011/09/in_the_cut_part_i_shots_in_the.html (http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/2011/09/in_the_cut_part_i_shots_in_the.html)
While I wasn't really bothered by the same things as Jim Emerson was, I do not like the editing in the past couple of Nolan films (the one's edited by Lee Smith). I find them too cutty, and often disorienting. I can understand the decision to tighten things as much as possible, but it seems like every cut is getting rid of a couple of frames of action, such that you might have somebody walking toward another person, and in the next shot, they've already reached the other person. To a large degree, audiences can accept this and can fill in a lot of those gaps, but it's just too much, particularly in The Dark Knight. That, coupled with the omnipresent Hans Zimmer score, makes the whole thing feel constantly rushed. I know that they have a lot of stuff packed into that movie, and it's already long enough as it is, but to me it just felt like they made an ideal cut, and then took two or three frames from the beginning and end of every shot.
The scene in the example here didn't bother me that much because it was fine enough to just get the sense of kinetic connections being made. I wasn't confused when watching it, but I also can't say that I had good spacial awareness either. I just didn't care about where everything was. I just thought: "Bazooka make car go boom now."
It was in the scenes where people are just talking to each other where I was really bothered, because it'd just feel so goddamned rushed and cutty.
Quote from: Reelist on September 11, 2011, 05:19:06 PM
http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/2011/09/in_the_cut_part_i_shots_in_the.html (http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/2011/09/in_the_cut_part_i_shots_in_the.html)
this video is too smartassy/not robag88y enough, lose the 'tude dude, i want the info, not the jibberjabber.
...but good breakdown, i agree, editing is definitely The Dark Knight's biggest weakness.
Quote from: 72teeth on September 12, 2011, 12:35:27 AM
Quote from: Reelist on September 11, 2011, 05:19:06 PM
http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/2011/09/in_the_cut_part_i_shots_in_the.html (http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/2011/09/in_the_cut_part_i_shots_in_the.html)
this video is too smartassy/not robag88y enough, lose the 'tude dude, i want the info, not the jibberjabber.
...but good breakdown, i agree, editing is definitely The Dark Knight's biggest weakness.
Indeed. It's still a great movie, but in hindsight I do remember those underpass scenes being inexplicably disorienting, but I guess I didn't want to rationalize it at the time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Apw4m0DRQuk&feature=channel_video_title
referencing my favorite movie nerd/ action hero once again.
these kids put it much more succinctly.
Quote from: pete on September 12, 2011, 12:12:53 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Apw4m0DRQuk&feature=channel_video_title
referencing my favorite movie nerd/ action hero once again.
these kids put it much more succinctly.
I agree with some of their points, but their "lamer, less clear" recut of that Mission Impossible 2 scene is actually about 10,000 times better than the original version.
Ugh, fucking Jim Emerson. I watched his first "I hate action movies that aren't the action movies I grew up on" videos and the more and more he talks, the less and less I want to live. That grating voice doesn't help the fact that all he is doing is nitpicking and not accepting that breaking formula is what advances film. Who gives a shit where Gordon is sitting in the back of the truck? How is it important to the scene? I made it four minutes into that video before I let myself turn it off due to blood boiling.
That's not to say I'm not disappointed in most action scenes now days, but boy, he is not helping anyone's case with his approach.
Well, I beat RK and made it through ten minutes, but I'm not happy about it. I can't say he made a single point in those ten minutes that I could grant him, even in my most charitable of moods. He elevates the minor continuity issues that occur in every movie ever made to game-breaking mistakes in visual grammar, he ignores contextual cues to make the case that individual shots don't give the viewer enough information, and most obnoxiously of all, he confuses "that's not the way I would have done it" with actually doing it wrong. Ugh. What a wanker.
So this video of a Tom Waits interview from 1979 has been swirling around the intertubs recently, because people are speculating that Heath Ledger based his performance as The Joker on it, and holy fucking shit Heath Ledger clearly based his performance as The Joker on this (skip to around 1:45).
It should be noted that squints called this four years ago and nobody listened. He was Nicolas Cage in Knowing and we were all Rose Byrne in Knowing.
Quote from: squints on May 30, 2008, 11:05:48 PM
I've just realized something. Heath Ledger's Joker is channeling Tom Waits through his voice. Listen to the joker in the latest trailer and then listen to Tom Waits telling a story in his normal speaking voice. Wow.
Wow, that is pretty much exact. Is there perhaps a side-by-side comparison video?
Quote from: squints on July 31, 2012, 12:39:57 PM
Quote from: S.R. on May 31, 2008, 12:01:34 AM
I'm stoned, too.
no one believed me.
I did... mostly because I saw this when it was first making the rounds a year ago.
C'mon slow pokes.