Just saw it, pretty enjoyable.  I have to say, handling Two-Face and his transformation from Dent in any Batman movie is a hard proposition, and I think this movie does a pretty admirable job of it. (as you can see I am being especially cautious, heh!)

Of course, Bale's 'intimidating Batman' voice is just hilarious, heh.

Well, I finally saw it.  All I'll say is that Ledger did a better job that I thought he would.  He was a great Joker.  It's a shame that he can't reprise the role in the next movie.

.... That's it?  With all the previous discussions above, I was rather hoping for a more detailed report from ya.  ;)

What did you think of Bale this time?  Gordon?  Was it dark enough for you?  Too dark?  Better or worse than Begins?

It's not, but I decided against posting my laundry list of issues with the movie.  I didn't feel like getting involved in a back and forth debate, so like XLord says, I thought the movie was good, but not great.  One thing I can agree with everyone on is that the Joker was the definite highlight of the movie.  From the moment he appears (okay, the second moment, what with how the first is very brief), he becomes the best aspect of it.  Pretty much every scene with him is worth watching.  Also, he has more in common with the cartoon Joker than I was led to believe, and that's a good thing.  Despite what Ryu said, he's really not much darker, as the sickest things he does are still implied when it comes to seeing the end result.  Maybe if the movie had been rated R, they wouldn't have cut away on some of those scenes, but it wasn't.  That works fine for me though.  You don't need the full brunt of disturbing imagery in order to get the message.  Also, he blows up an empty hospital, which very clearly spells out the limits of a PG-13 movie.

What did you think of Bale this time?

He was serviceable.  I liked him more in Begins for the simple reason that he was more of a consistent and leading figure in that movie.  In TDK it feels like his personal struggles take a backseat to the theatrics *and even the philosophical question* of the Joker and the role of Dent.  Also, he still needs to fix that Batman voice, but I bet that everyone is in agreement on that.

Gordon?

Better than in Begins.  Getting more attention as commissioner helps, but he seemed like a more established character in TDK.

Was it dark enough for you?  Too dark?

It wasn't too dark.  It was trying to be, but since the movie is rated PG-13, they could only go so far.  Ultimately it's not much darker than Burton's 1989 original.  It just takes itself more seriously most of the time and the settings are less fanciful/gothic.  I wish that it had more moments like the part where Alfred worries about being labeled an accomplice and Wayne tells Alfred that he's going to tell the public that the whole Batman gig was his idea.  Instead, the Joker is the least oppressive character in the movie despite simultaneously being the most vicious.  Go figure.  I always looked forward to seeing the Joker because he relieved the self-seriousness of the movie.  He also served to provide the movie with some steady pacing, as there were moments (especially in the first hour or so) where scenes and transitions were moving too quickly.  The beginning with Scarecrow and its immediate resolution just leaves you scratching your head.  The jumping from situation to situation gets better towards the middle (lots of Joker involvement) and then resumes towards the very end when they're trying to rush the establishment of a murderous pattern for Two-Face.  Ultimately I think that the darkness wasn't much of an issue.  It was dark enough for Batman just as the Burton movies and animated series stuff were.  It's the greater emphasis that is placed on practical and backdrop 'realism' that makes the Nolan movies feel different.

Better or worse than Begins?

Good question.  I'm going to have to say worse because Begins was more focused.  TDK has the more interesting character dynamics, but Begins was the more tightly constructed and thusly more enjoyable movie.  TDK felt like it was trying to do too much all at once sometimes, and as a result it's hard sometimes to sink your teeth into the experience.  Certain events aren't entirely believeable and other elements seem underdeveloped or they get dropped part of the way through the film.  Yet for all the disjointed chaos that is the structure of the film itself, it does concern itself with a number of psychological and philosophical issues for the characters, which at least makes it interesting.  The scattered moments of brilliance suggest that it could've been better, but as it is, it's good.  It's just not the most enjoyable Batman story I've ever experienced, and I still believe that the animated series achieves the best balance between style and substance (TDK does not have the monopoly on human issues in a Batman story), but Heath's performance makes it worthwhile.

It looks like I wound up saying a lot anyway.  Oh, but one thing the movie did improve upon from Begins was the camerawork for the fights.  You can actually see Batman's moves this time.  The whole sonar thing towards the end was a dizzying eyesore though.

Yeah, it's an intense PG-13.  I mean, Two-Face's appearance alone was pushing the limits, I thought.  Not to mention... Ryan the bat impersonator's hanging body.  Damn, that was cold.

You know, I must be one of the few who really digs the voice.  As Shoe says, Bale's got a bit of David Hayter's Snake channeling going on there, which I naturally love.  More than that though, I'm impressed with Bale's capacity to do up Wayne with a reasonably genuine American accent.  That as well as his Western-American accent in 3:10 To Yuma.

I love every moment between Alfred and Bruce.  I really do.  If it were up to, Caine would also get a supporting actor's award - or at least a strong nomination.

That was a bit of a throwaway scene, it's true - like it was just tacked on to resolve his story from the end of Begins.  Ryu must've been pleased though, being that he wasn't a fan of said character.  ;)

Thanks for the impressions!

I must admit, that one caught me by surprise.

Even Snake's voice isn't THAT hoarse.  So Bale is actually British, isn't he?  You might find this hard to believe, but I never knew until I saw him speaking with the accent in an interview a few days ago.

No prob.

The blu-ray will probably have an unrated edition.
I agree with the studio's choice to pg-13 this movie though, because i don't think any youngsters should have to be deprived of seeing this just because they might have an overly-sensitive soccer mom who refuses to let her children watch R films.

It looked like it was stolen directly from the Objective Briefings in Metal Gear's VR Missions..

Did you notice how they had Rachel take Meryl's line about heroes needing to 'not give up on people'?

Just one last mention of "Like A Dog Chasing Cars."  I did up a quick and dirty six-minute suite of this most awesome theme, which consists of the four reprisals on the soundtrack release. 

In context, it does appear to serve as the new heroic theme for Batman -- which, to me, makes it the main theme of The Dark Knight itself.  As far as its use in the final battle with the sonar, it sounds like the version that plays is actually the one from "Introduce a Little Anarchy."

Dark Knight - Main Theme Suite:
http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/angie_liu … c.&.view=l

Just saw the movie. Was underwhelmed. It was inferior to Burton's Batman in every way. Heath Ledger was excellent as the Joker, but so was Jack Nicholson. As for the soundtrack, I really didn't notice it. I did however notice the soundtrack to Burton's Batman right from the onset (one of Elfman's best themes in my opinion). I'm a fan of classic comics such as "The Dark Knight Returns" and "The Long Halloween" (both series are well worth reading), and I agree that the animated television series does the best job of capturing that spirit. However, Burton did a superb job as well, and in fact he's really the guy responsible for bringing Batman back to it's iconic stature and the appeal it has today. Certainly it wasn't a "bad" film, but nothing at all like the rave reviews it's getting.

cheers,

-avatar!

Surprised you didn't like this one, Av, considering it felt much like Dark Knight Returns in tone and style (except without a 60 year old Batman). And have you read Dark Knight Strikes Again? If so, what did you think of that one?

I agree with you on the soundtrack for the Nolan films, Elfman's work is brilliant, and Burton deserves the kudos for a great job (and Schumacher deserves to burn in hell for what he did to the franchise---it was from that disgusting bullshit that Nolan had to redeem Batman yet again), and Nicholson gave us a Joker far closer to the character than the 60s Batman crap (although Hamill's Joker is very distinct from the Nicholson one), but disagree with the rest of what you claimed.

Odd statement indeed, considering that TDK draws inspirations from those two comic series specifically. (Especially The Long Halloween.)  Far more than Burton's films, anyway.

I have to say that I prefer the Nolan Batman films to either Burton's or Schumacher's.  Obviously the Burton original was awesome at the time... there wasn't really much competition for serious superhero movies when it came out.  I watched a lot of it on TV the other day and was surprised by just how badly it's aged, though.  Outside of the effects, a LOT of it seems just cheesy (gotta love the sheer amount of Prince in it).  Nicholson did a serviceable job as the Joker, but he's really just Nicholson playing Nicholson.  Batman Returns, on the other hand, is my favorite of the 90's films.  That said, it is a TERRIBLE Batman movie.  It's a great Tim Burton movie and I love it to death, but as a representation of the comic character it's pretty abysmal.  I mean, Batman shoves dynamite onto some guy and throws him into a sewer - this is a character whose number one rule is never to kill people, right?  And the Penguin is nothing like the comic character at all.  The best things to come out of those movies are the Elfman scores, though... those are amazing and some of my favorite film scores of all time.

Batman Begins and The Dark Knight for me are more in line with what I like about the comics.  I think they're a better representation of all characters involved than any of the 90s movies were.  Sure Bale's Batman voice is a little bit over the top, but that's part of the point.  When there are people that he meets constantly as both Batman and Bruce Wayne, it makes sense that he should try to disguise his voice as much as possible.

Anyway, I really liked TDK, and it's probably my favorite Batman film yet.  While the cartoon is still the ultimate watchable interpretation, it's only so because there are so many episodes that it has the time to develop all the characters more.  For a 2.5 hour movie, I think that TDK really nails it.  I'm hoping that the same crew comes back for a third one. I would LOVE to see the Riddler as the villain - he's easily my favorite Batman villain and he would be easy to fit in with the more realistic world that the Nolans have set these in (as opposed to, say, Man-Bat).  It would also be great to see Catwoman come back if they feel the need to have another love interest for Bruce/Batman.  It seems these guys would treat the character with a LOT more respect than that completely and utterly awful Catwoman movie (which I consider even worse than the Schumacher Batman films).

^  I think the Riddler would be a great choice too if Nolan makes another movie.  Heh, when Fox said that the new suit would work well against cats I thought of Pfeiffer's Catwoman stabbing Keaton in the side.  I wonder if Nolan will go the route of making Batman the dominant persona, especially since Bruce Wayne won't want to deal with the loss he endured in TDK, and Catwoman would be a nice 'rebound'.  Really, he could go various ways with this film---answering the fate of Dent/Two-Face, how to handle the Joker (perhaps through a surrogate, like Harley), and not to mention the obvious theme with which he ended TDK.

There'll be a lot of things that Nolan has to clear up and deal with in the third movie.  Rachel was little more than a plot device in TDK, however, and Wayne hardly seemed affected by her in the end.  He just conveniently has nothing left to prevent him from devoting his life to Batman.

I'm interested in how Batman will redeem himself or atone for his 'sins', because it's going to be difficult for Batman to deal with both the good guys and the bad guys at the same time.  He needs to have the trust of the public.  Not fully, as he never has it fully, but they have to at least give him the benefit of the doubt.

Riddler is the obvious choice for the villain in the next movie.  He's the first one I thought of and the first one that everyone else seems to be thinking of as well.  I'm not sure how Catwoman would work.  I imagine she'd have to be more like the cartoon one and less like the one in Batman Returns.  In the cartoon, she's almost like Batman except that she's sometimes willling to cross the line where Batman won't.  She's not dissimilar in Batman Returns, but she's obviously a little more supernatural in her abilities and a little more extreme her actions. (she's a cat burglar and animal rights activist in the cartoon, whereas in the movie she's a bit of a tortured psycho, heh heh)  Makes for an interesting love story that can never end the way you wish it could.

I'd argue that Joker's elaborate plans already made him too similar to the Riddler, albeit w/o the puzzle aspect. Personally, I'd rather have Harley Quinn out for revenge, with Catwoman there to help/hurt the Bats. After all, didn't Lucius make a reference about his armor being able to stop cats?

I just hope Nolan still limits the number of villains to two. We don't need another Spider-Man 3 mess.

I think the difference in intention between Riddler and Joker would be enough to justify using the Riddler.  In The Dark Knight, the Joker was purely about sending people into chaos and trying to bring out the worst in people.  The Riddler tends to go after more tangible rewards for his efforts.  Catwoman's comic and B:TAS versions would work okay in the film too... there's really nothing supernatural about her, and they could easily move her more toward the "anti-hero" side if the film is too crowded with villains.  I could also see the Penguin showing up as a suave but shady club owner.  He wouldn't have to be a major force in the movie, but it could be cool to have him show up.

Sorta unrelated thought, but I thought it was pretty clear cut that we wouldn't be seeing Two-Face again in a third film.  However, last week I saw Aaron Eckart quoted as saying he'd love to return for another movie.  Does he know something we don't?

Batman got up and walked away, there's no reason to assume that Two-Face didn't survive and got tossed into Arkham.  Perhaps I've read too many comics, but it takes a lot to convince me a comic character's dead.  = P  I half-expect Ra's al Ghul to return.

Not sure what's so odd about it. I thought TDK failed in capturing the spirit of the comics and Burton did not. Of course TLH wasn't released when Burton made his films, but I still think they're a much better Batman. As for recent comics being quite similar to TDK, that's to be expected! DC is owned by Warner Bros, so of course many months before the movie is released they have to make the comic books similar to the movie. This isn't anything new, they've been doing this for years before a new movie is released (and hey, movies and marketing go together... unfortunately). Although Batman doesn't generally kill these days, he certainly has in the past. I actually find a Batman that on occasion kills someone more realistic than someone who no matter what refuses to kill.

"Hey I just killed the person you loved most, and plenty of innocent people, and I'll do it again..."

'Oh, yeah, well that's OK, I'll just take you alive, but just so you know, I'm kinda pissed at you.'

Yeah, anyway. The movie in general is targeted at a young audience, and of course they're going to think it's the greatest thing (the movie nearly put me to sleep, to be honest). 20 years or so from now, when they again reinvent the Batman series for the next generation, the same thing will happen. People will look back at the current Batman films and say they're so boring (which I agree with Anyway, to each their own. I did read TDK Strikes Again, and thought it was boring. I thought it was nothing like the classic, in so much as that it tried and failed to be SO much like the original.

cheers,

-avatar!

ps Saw Hellboy 2, liked it much more!

That's an even odder statement.  If anything, TDK is far more adult-geared than any Batman movie adaptation before it.  You don't need to make your hero a killer to capture an older crowd.

You sure you were watching the right movie?  Or are you just throwing out blanketed statements at random?

Yes, Batman is going to be the very dominant one when he gets Catwoman into bed (she will be written as very 'submissive and GLB' (Gentle Like Ben)) when it comes to 'intimate encounters of a sexytime-nature'.
The only time she's not so submissive and GLB is if you pull her tail, then she turns into a raging cat-bitch like Pfeiffer was.

I wish Jocker's cocktail party-crashin' line had been (instead of 'Ladies and GentleMen),

'Ladies and Gentle-Ben, we are tonight's entertainment!!'

who the hell is Gentle Ben??

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2008/jul/1 … tman-fans/
"An online survey by Fandango, the company handling Regal Cinemas' tickets, of more than 3,000 "Dark Knight" fans last week showed this late-night trend:
...
71 are younger than 34"

sounds like the demographic definitely concurs to a young audience! Now, what makes you think TDK is "far more adult-geared"? Please provide some statistics, references, etc...

cheers,

-avatar!

Sen-ken-so!

Ippon-mei!

Azroit!! (sic)

When did ages 18-34 not be considered adult?

You took exactly what I was going to say...

I never said adults weren't going to see the film, I merely said a young audience. In fact, if you assume a normal Gaussian distribution, and that the tail starts at age 13 (it is PG-13 I think) then the peak will be at 24.5 years. Burton's Batman came out in 1989. That's nearly 20 years ago. It's highly unlikely 4.5 year olds saw Burton's Batman (at least not in the theaters), therefore this movie is targeted at the younger generation. That's what I mean  by young audience.

-avatar!

I'm not sure how you can quote an online survey for statistics. Certainly the people more likely to order tickets online skew younger.

Here's what Warner Bros. said:
The studio reported that audience demographics for the film were ideally broad, with males representing 52 percent of patrons and ticket-buyers evenly split between those under 25 and older moviegoers.

I've read that Nolan thinks Penguin is too campy, but I do think that having him as a background character as you suggested could work.

Has there been any talk of Robin or Batgirl appearing? I don't think they mentioned Gordon having a daughter, but they could just say she was off at college or something. Sidekicks could come off as campy, but I'd love to see Nolan try for the heck of it.

So you're saying that the movie is being targeted at people who never saw Burton's movie in its heyday and therefore never had the appropriate feelings of appreciation for it?  That makes sense.  You're saying it's Batman for this generation and that that's why people are loving it so much, perhaps to the point of overrating it.

There's only one problem...it seems like most everyone in this thread has been a Batman fan since at least the first Burton movie.  So what you're saying could be true in the general sense, but when you bring it up here as one of your points, it's not going to go over so well with the long-time Batman fans who happen to like TDK a great deal.

I think that, in time, the movie will come back down to earth a little bit and be regarded as one of the best Batman movies.  To say that it's the best one 'by far' just because it's so adult or whathaveyou is a shortsighted perspective that won't stand the test of time.  Once people have time to get past Heath Ledger's death, they'll see that it might be the best since Burton's 1989 movie, but it doesn't trump it.  Not unless all they're looking at is the self-seriousness and modernism of the thing, which would be just one way of looking at it.  The Burton approach has qualities than Nolan's approach lacks and vice-versa.

Also, you know what kind of sucked about TDK?  No Bat Cave or Wayne Manor.  It's no wonder that Bruce Wayne had little presence without them.  Let's hope that Wayne Manor is rebuilt in the third movie.

Just drop it, Angie. All it means is he can't be part of the cool club.

I agree wholeheartedly with what you said. Personally, TDK just didn't do it for me on so many levels. Also, despite Ledger's great performance, I felt the Joker was much more like a modern homicidal maniac than the comic book villain. After all, the Joker is best known for his laughing gas that literally has you "laughing to death" (not seen in TDK)! Also the Joker typically has all these cool gadgets besides his laughing gas such as really funky guns, killer robots, etc, (these can be seen in the comics, as well as the cartoon series, and the Burton movie). None of these were in TDK! Instead, in the TDK, the Joker just blows things up and shoots people. Sorry I found that kinda lame. Anyway, if you enjoyed the movie that's all that matters. I was entirely underwhelmed, as mentioned. Now, I really really hope Watchmen will have substance and style (but I'm not holding my breath)!

cheers,

-avatar!

I'm pretty sure both Nolan and Bale have said they want nothing to do with Robin for their take on the series.  I'm inclined to agree, if not for merely practical reasons.  If they actually had an appropriately aged Robin come in, whoever the actor is would be too old to play him in a subsequent film.  Gordon DOES have a daughter in TDK - she's in that final scene and appears to be younger than his son.  That kind of fits with this being really early in this Batman timeline; everybody is really young and Gordon JUST got promoted to commissioner.  We'd be a long way off from having Batgirl show up.

I vote that we have him arrested on a DTD charge (Daring To Disagree)..

I dunno, what-say-you

I understood what Bale was saying as Batman, but a lot of people hated the voice he used.  Here's a 'deleted scene' parody between him and Joker mocking it:  http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1824339