The fact that I care that he could possibly not care about his daughter indicates I have some empathy. I have just enough empathy to squeak by. If I were to totally lack empathy, then I would possibly be in prison right now or dead.

It is only "suspicious" because you don't know what you are talking about and just presume to know.  It's easier to jump to conclusions than to simply wait like a decent person would do while the medical examiners do their job.

...and in the end, the death has been deemed accidental.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/ … topstories

Of particular note, the father says this:

"While no medications were taken in excess, we learned today the combination of doctor-prescribed drugs proved lethal for our boy. Heath's accidental death serves as a caution to the hidden dangers of combining prescription medication, even at low dosage."

The latest trailer for The Dark Knight is online, and it is sweet.  Dunno what it is, but every shot of The Joker with a weapon - be it a knife, gun, or rocket launcher - looks insanely badass to me.  Be forewarned, though; there's some potential spoilers involving Dent in there.  Not that you couldn't guess what they are, though: 

http://www.whysoserious.com/happytrails/trailer.htm

Uggh, they brought the BatTank back. Even the BatPod looks kinda chunky. I'll stick with the Lamborghini.

I know Joker's been getting the most hype, but I'm most interested in (Spoilers!) what direction they'll be taking Two-Face. His characterization was absolutely ridiculous in Batman Forever. Since he was a DA, I'd much rather see him fighting against the villains, albeit in a much harsher, crazier way than Batman.

I notice they don't actually show Two-Face in the trailer, though, which makes me wonder if we're in for another "twist" regarding who the real main villain will be.(End spoilers.)

Between Iron Man, Indy, and this, I'm gonna be in nerdvana this summer.

Well, again, there are certain spoilers to be spotted in the trailer.  A frame by frame analysis reveals that..... Dent will indeed become Two-Face throughout the course of the film; 1:53 appears to show the pivotal moment, while at 2:02, you can see that he's already scarred.

As far as his characterization goes, I believe you nailed it exactly right.  Nolan himself has stated that Two-Face will this time be portrayed as a twisted vigilante to emphasize his role as Batman's counterpart.  That "he is still true to himself. He's a crime fighter, he's not killing good people. He's not a bad guy, not purely."

I'm starting to wonder about Scarecrow, actually.  Will his role be at all prominent this time around?

^ Ugh, I had no idea Scarecrow is coming back for this one.

As of this post, The Dark Knight is peaking the Tomatometer at 100% with fifteen reviews. 

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_dark_knight/

Friday can't come soon enough.

Opening day for me (I hope!). My friend is going to try getting the tickets tomorrow at the local IMAX theater.

Have you heard the soundtrack yet, Wanderer?  Seems pretty much in the same vein as Begins; still more rooted in Zimmer than Howard, but with sturdier rhythmic progressions and a few new interesting "sound effect" musical ideas.  Howard's theme for Dent is masterfully orchestrated, and while I'm Not a Hero, Aggressive Expansion, and Agent of Chaos are all fairly decent action cues, "Like a Dog Chasing Cars," to me, is a cut above the rest.  I just can't get enough of that driving tone of heroism on display.

Yeah, I've heard it. I thought the "Batman Begins" score was adequate in the film (and ponderous on disc) and this is pretty much more of the same. Then again, I've always liked Howard more than Zimmer and the latter seems to be the one in charge.

I do like the Harvey Dent track (mostly Howard) and the brooding "Watch the World Burn". Aside from the action music (which reprises a lot of the previous score), the music stays in the background, very menacing and static. I'm sure it will all serve the movie very well but I prefer more thematically active music.

(For an IMAX update, on opening day, 12 AM, 3 AM and 6 AM are all sold out. On a work day. This movie is going to make a FORTUNE.)

A friend of mine attended the IMAX premiere here in NYC last night.  Loved the movie, and he said he was awestruck by the IMAX experience.  "The aerial views of Gotham, in particular, were truly a sight to behold." 

I'm vying for an IMAX seat myself, but I'll likely have to settle for the local theater this Friday.

Saw the movie just an hour ago. Not bad at all.

Even better? The f---ing Watchmen trailer! :D:D

I can't figure out why people like the Watchmen trailer, unless those people were already fans of the comic.  I've never read it.  I thought the trailer was incoherent and mockworthy.  I hope a better trailer comes out.

And I saw The Dark Knight last night at midnight too, and was impressed.  The movie started and was pretty much non-stop until the credits began.

Just came back from the first showing today; at last, a movie to rival Speed Racer as my favorite film of 2008. 

I knew going in that Dark Knight was looking to break away from the typical comic book film fodder - even more so than Begins.  But this..... this is gritty Michael Mann-style crime drama stuff.  Dense, smart, ruthless, and darkly visceral in all the right ways; it just completely encompasses what Batman is all about. 

The story and direction of the characters -- as far as I'm concerned, they are now the definitive telling of the Batman mythology.  Even characters like Gordon, Fox, and Alfred - they all having compelling story arcs that are leagues ahead of any adaptation before it.  But it's the triangle of conflict between Batman, Joker, and Two-Face that's the heart of the movie, not to mention the inner struggles of conflict and ideology that both Wayne and Dent contend with.  All of the actors are on top of their collective game, but Ledger's clearly the star of the show here.  I'd be utterly stupefied if that posthumous award doesn't come to fruition, because his performance is balls-out maniacal brilliance.

This ain't a comic book movie, it's a graphic novel gracefully lavished onto the silver screen.  And as a cinema experience, it provides a hell of a lot of bang for your buck.  I can't wait for the eventual IMAX viewing.

Why do I always feel so skeptical when something new comes out and people are quick to proclaim it as better than everything which came before?

I'll be comparing TDK to the animated series (and Mask of the Phantasm) moreso than the original Tim Burton movie.  It's going to take a lot for Bale's Batman to unseat Kevin Conroy's as the best.  His performance in BB didn't even come close.  I'll also be comparing Heath's performance to the great balance between scary and funny that Mark Hamill's Joker achieved.  I hope that Heath isn't only disturbing like it appears in the trailers.  I want to find him funny before he surprises me with his dark insanity.  That's what the Joker is all about.  He's hilarious until you find yourself at the mercy of his whims.

Anyways, I'll be impressed if TDK manages to surpass the blending of style and substance (the man and the myth) that made the animated series so great, but since everyone is hyping it so much, maybe it's worthy of the comparison.  I actually feel like BB was only almost on par with the 1989 Tim Burton movie when you consider the different strengths and weakness of each, but it wouldn't be impossible for TDK to be better than the original.  For it to be better than the animated series though...that will truly be a challenge.  I need to see this movie soon.

Comparing this movie to the cartoon is really unfair to the cartoon.  I think Christian Bale has done a fine job as Batman and Ledger has given us the best Joker yet.  Don't get me wrong, Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill's voice work are tops, and I love the cartoon---I own them on dvd and I'd buy them all over again on bluray if they'd ever get to work on them (the same is true for Burton's Batman and Batman Returns).  Sadly, the cartoon wasn't really allowed to show the Joker at his worst as he did beat a Robin to death* with a crowbar in the comics.  I enjoy Nicholson's performance as the Joker, but Ledger's Joker had great lines, great laugh, and great scenes.  To be honest, people will just have to admire each of those in their own way (I can't imagine how they can admire the 1960's Batman though... but I never liked it), it isn't required to prefer one exclusively over the others.

* Note:  comic book deaths aren't permanent states of (non-)being.

Unfair to the cartoon?  Why?  I figured it would be unfair to the movie...  I doubt the movie can match the cartoon's depiction of Batman as something of a mythical and yet mortal figure in a gothic/film noir setting.  All the crime saga comparisons make it sound like the movie is going to be gritty and realistic (like Michael Mann's Heat?), just like BB was, and BB didn't come close to the stylishness of the cartoon or that of the 1989 movie.  And no offense to whatever better effort might've been put into the score compared to BB, but I doubt that the TDK soundtrack will even approach Elfman's score for the 1989 movie, of which the cartoon makes use of the main theme.

No?  Did you see what Joker did to a Robin in the Batman Beyond movie?  Any brute can beat someone to death.  Also, I think he actually kills that one guy in the laughing fish episode of TAS season two.  And he definitely kills a guy in Mask of the Phantasm, so however funny he was, I never forgot that he was just as dangerous.

Anyways, you're singling out the darkness as if that's all there is to the Joker.  He needs to be funny too, and if Mark Hamill's Joker is more entertaining than Heath's, that's a point in the cartoon Joker's favor, even if Heath might get a point for being darker.

Now that's a view I can agree with.  If people were saying this, I wouldn't have a problem.  Instead they're claiming TDK to be so much deeper and darker, the same way that Xenogears fans claim that one to be so much deeper and darker than other RPGs.  Needless to say, I wasn't all that impressed with the overall experience of Xenogears, though I hope that won't be the case with TDK.  Darkness isn't everything, and excessive darkness for the sake of shock value is even less.  I'll see where TDK (which is only PG-13 after all) lies in that spectrum.

Considering I've seen them all, I'm confident in my statement. 

Well, that 'stylishness' has more to do with Tim Burton's take on the source material, doesn't it?

No, Elfman's score of Batman and Returns trumps both of the new movies in my opinion, but the soundtracks work within the movie itself.

The cartoon fails to touch exactly what the Joker can do.  It was never going to be able to touch it, because of US animation 'standards', or lack thereof.  Ledger's Joker got to do all of that, and Nolan's script provided well for the character.

I am rather curious where you stand.  Though, from this discussion, I find it funny that the cartoon, and NOT the comic on which it all originates, is your metric.  = P  Don't feel bad, the cartoon and Burton movies are what I base mine on as well.

And Xenogears was shit.  I hate to think this conversation even required the mention of that ... what did I call it before?  An 'abortion'?  Yeah.

Let us know what you think after you see it!

I haven't been following the adverts and trailers for this movie but this is the first time I've heard mention of another villan besides the Joker. Is his character downplayed/overshadowed much in this film? Looking to see this probably after the opening (college kids flooding the halls) weekend.

I've been a fan of the comic since I read it close to four years ago. I recognized every scene they did, and it looks like they're doing some justice to the book. I would've preferred maybe a 12 episode mini series on TV, but then I don't think that'd fit what Watchmen is trying to do.

Now all I need is more news on the Preacher TV series, and I'll be a right happy camper.

No doubt.  That doesn't make it any less compelling though.

I'll let the movie convince me then.

Why would I feel bad?  I have no knowledge of the comics, but I've never been one to be overly concerned about sticking to the source material, especially when that source material was on a different medium.  Moving literature (no one is going to get mad if I refer to comics as literature, right?) to film is to me more a matter of providing an 'interpretation' than a matter of reproducing the same thing in a different medium.  The cartoon and the Burton movies are works of film, and as a result, I feel it's perfectly appropriate to use them as my metric when judging another Batman film.  Now if there was a discussion on whether the comics or one of the movies do the Batman story better, then I wouldn't involve myself in the conversation because I don't know much about the comics.

So it appears that we're on the same boat then, which actually bodes well for my opinion of TDK.  And if you're actually very familiar with the comics and yet you favor the film and television iterations anyways, then that's even better.

Even so, my point is that certain things get hailed for being so much darker or smarter, even when they may not be as well-crafted as something else on the whole.  We can use Star Trek as example.  Is DS9 better than TNG because the characters are supposedly so much deeper?  Because it uses arc-based storytelling?  Not to me.  I think TNG at its best has the better constructed stories and the more memorable characters.  There's more to the art of film than just telling a complex story.  To use another example, Jurassic Park shouldn't be judged an average movie based on some smug assessment of its 'limited' plot.  The experience speaks for itself.  The music, the pacing, the thrill, the structure of the thing.  Anyways, I'm rambling now, but I thought I'd explain myself and my views a little better.

Will do.  Actually, someone recently told me that Ledger's performance is not unlike that of Kefka from FFVI.  That definitely piques my interest considering what a big FFVI and Kefka fan I am.

Seeing as how it was my comment that apparently sparked this topic of clashing viewpoints, allow me to verify that, yeah, when I said "definitive telling of the Batman mythology", I was referring largely to the comics as its point of origin.  Regardless, as far as personal preferences go, I was quick to proclaim The Dark Knight better than everything before it, because to me, it really is the best - and that's taking into fair account the cartoon series and every previous movie adaptation.  For me, there's just no equal.

As for the argument that darker doesn't always mean better, I can certainly agree to that - but in Batman's case, I'd say it's a trait that's more favorably apt.  Batman's roots have always been steeped in dark vigilante violence and crime drama, and TDK encapsulates those elements perfectly.  Which isn't to say that the movie is so dark that it borders on grim and dreary; on the contrary, there are actually several moments of clever humor and sly wit that had the audience enjoying a good laugh on many occasion.  Ledger's antics for the Joker, in particular, while sordidly deranged and brimming with that edge of danger, is hugely entertaining.  I suspect that's what any fan is looking for in a good Joker.

Two-Face does indeed play a role, but right up front, this is more of a Harvey Dent film.  In fact, I would go so far as to say that the story's central scope revolves more around Dent than any other character, Batman and the Joker included.

Time will tell if history agrees with you.  If when people think of Batman from now on, the first one that will come into their minds is Nolan's version.  Still, I know of people who thought that BB was better than everything which came before, so I won't believe that TDK really is until I see it.  That's not to say that I don't hope TDK is that good.  I'm hoping that it'll be one of the best movies I've seen in a long time.  I just don't see it replacing the style of Batman as depicted in TAS and as far as the two Justice League series.  I like that style too much, and unless TDK's approach to Batman is somehow considerably different from the way BB approached it, that style will remain my favorite.  Also, Bale comes off as too cocky.  I suppose that's just the way he comes off as an actor, which is why I notice it in every role he does, and not just BB.  I hope he at least fixes that overly gruff Batman voice.  It was overexaggerated in BB when he had that guy hanging upside down.

Gary Oldman as Commissioner Gordon is weird too. (he just seemed cowardly and weaselly somehow in BB)  I'm sure that TDK will add all sorts of depth to him, but in terms of looks, voice, and personality, I'll probably always favor the Gordon from TAS.  That's just Gordon to me, and all others will be viewed as takes on that defining version.

True, but there's always the Bruce Wayne side of things serving as a counterbalance to his darker nature.

That's good to hear.  I've read a few reviews that do in fact say the movie is too dark for its own good and that there are a number of generic action scenes that make the movie more bloated than it should be.  I'll be sure to take all perspectives into consideration after I've seen it for myself.

This is what someone else whose opinion I put a lot of stock into noted as well.  That the movie is more about Harvey Dent than anyone else.  He also said that there's a great scene between Dent and the Joker.  I'm looking forward to it.

My biggest issue with TDK before even watching it it is that I didn't like BB at all. I'll be definitely watching TDK, but only because I'm highly interested in the Joker portrayal by Ledger rather than it being a BB sequel.

Wow... if there were one single character/aspect of Begins that I thought I'd never see questioned, it's Oldman's performance as Gordon.  I thought he absolutely nailed the part based on all of the Batman comics I've read, and that the excellent TAS version could just be an older version of the same character.

Maybe it's hard for me to see Oldman acting kind of meek with those glassy eyes of his and not find myself thinking of all the villains he has played in past movies.  It's possible that he'll just take some getting used to for me.

Gordon is awesome in TDK.  In fact, he elicited the biggest round of applause from the audience during one particular scene.

I haven't seen Dark Night, but I'll try to make time to see it sometime in the next two weeks or so.  I didn't really like Batman Begins, so like Datschge, I'm really only interested in seeing how Ledger does as The Joker.

As for 2008, my favorite film so far is In Bruges, followed by Iron Man and The Bank Job.  I haven't see WALL-E, so I can't comment on that one.

You sure called it right:

http://movies.msn.com/movies/article.as … &GT1=28101

At least Warner Bros. is set to make up for their losses from Speed Racer.

A closer inspection of the soundtrack after seeing the movie confirms what I'd expected.  Like many a Zimmer CD release before it, the tracklisting is largely out of order and misnamed in a lot of places.  It'll be tough putting them back into proper chronlogical order without a few more viewings (and believe you me, a few more viewings is inevitable), but I can at least confirm that "Like A Dog Chasing Cars" is a piece designated for one of the final action sequences in the movie.  And I believe the actual name of the song should've been "Aggressive Expansion."

I was impressed with all the psychology, dilemas, interactions, and choices which ALL of the main characters had to make, which resulted in a terrific HUMAN story rather than a SUPERHERO story.

Well, I saw The Dark Night last night.  I thought it was good, not great.  Ledger made for a great joker, and Eckhart's Dent was well done too.  I still don't particularly like Bale as Bruce Wayne or his fake deep Batman voice.  My biggest problem with the flick is that there is no indication of even remotely how The Joker is able to pull off such big feats of terrorism with little to no help.

I thought the movie was riveting. Maybe a little too long... but that's just a minor detail. Beautifully acted, staged, photographed, you name it. And on IMAX, it's oppressive as all hell. There's just no escaping the bleakness of the picture.

Music worked fine in the picture, especially the keening distorted note that played for the Joker.  This isn't one of those films that relies heavily on its score.

The only cue I recognized (and that played without any edits) was "Watch the World Burn." The soundtrack seems to be a mixture of heavy edits and suites.