Lounge of Tomorrow

Lounge of Tomorrow (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/index.php)
-   Beatnik (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   The Dark Knight - [spoilers ahead, ye be warned] (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/showthread.php?t=8183)

Gemini Cricket 07-19-2008 10:23 AM

$66.4 mil for TDK's opening day.

Cadaverous Pallor 07-20-2008 02:26 AM

Another boo for the batgrowl. Otherwise, had a lot of fun. Ledger absolutely NAILED and KILLED. Oldman continues to be amazing, loved Eckhart.

Spoiler:
This one was kinda loose and there was a bit too much talking. I did like that it didn't feel too structured or formulaic. The Two Face effect was perfect.

Why did they cast Batman as the Bush Administration, invading our privacy to keep us safe? I mean, ok, use the tech but did they have to highlight it as being immoral?

I cried during the Dent crescendo. I was worried I wouldn't buy his transformation but his issues ended up speaking to me pretty deeply. That plus Gordon, beautiful.

Also dug that the citizens of Gotham proved the Joker wrong.

Did I mention that the Joker was fvcking amazing?? Scary, funny, dead. on. perfect.

I found Gyllenhall completely unlikable. I don't know what I want out of that character. On first viewing Begins, I didn't like Holmes, but on second viewing, I liked her. Maybe I'll like Gyllenhall next time? Eh. I thought her acting was pretty wooden. Seriously, the Joker grabs you and that's the most frightened you can conjure?

Batcycle was bitchen, as was the Lambourghini (closest any production car could get to a Batmobile).

Gemini Cricket 07-20-2008 08:35 AM

TDK sets opening-weekend box office record of $155.34 mil. - Breaking News on CNN.com.
:eek:

BarTopDancer 07-20-2008 09:43 AM

Loved it!

The batgrowl was a bit much towards the end. Didn't bother me until then.

I don't follow the comic book at all, so I have no idea how close it is to it. It was a beautiful movie as well. Our IMAX screen wasn't "typical" but man it was gorgeous to watch.

Had a hard time sleeping last night too.
Spoiler:
stupid clowns


I think I was also tensed up during most of the movie, which made it hard to relax.

LSPoorEeyorick 07-20-2008 09:52 AM

Really? People don't like Gyllenhaal? I think she was 100 times better than Holmes (and, actually 100 times more attractive.)

It's the end of the weekend... we're still using spoiler tags? I don't think any opinions need to go in them anymore - maybe plot twists still do, though.

I really enjoyed the film. I was riveted the whole time. Ledger made interesting and brave choices and further proved that he left us as he was really getting into his performance groove.

Spoiler:
I loved what they did with Harvey Dent - I liked him much more than I did the Tommy Lee Jones version. I didn't read the comics, so I don't know which is more faithful, but I definitely liked this better. Action movie plots tend to wash over me, so well-paced ones with structure/loophole problems rarely bother me. But I did really appreciate the idea that Harvey took the fall for Batman, for the greater good - and in the end Batman took the fall for Harvey, for the same reason.

innerSpaceman 07-20-2008 10:04 AM

Yeah, ditto, Maggie over Katie. Though ...

Spoiler:
Considering Rachel's fate, I think they should have kept the same actress for all the trouble they went through to re-cast, because the improvement was marginal to me.

Hmmm, the fake-out of Gordon's death diminished the impact on me of Rachel's death. Too bad, that.


And speaking of death ... isn't it ironic they chose to kill off Harvey Dent and let the Joker live? It was only at the movie's end that this realworld twist caused me to bitterly recall the sad fate of Heath Ledger. To his credit, that was the first moment since he appeared on screen that I thought of Ledger at all.


* * * *

About the Bush Administration references ... I didn't mind that in a movie that was going to give each character a moral dilemma or two. Considering Batman's role in society, I think the ethics of fighting crime was a perfect subject. And since it was raised in multiple ways, for Batman as well as for Harvey Dent, I think one or two Bushisms were bound to come up as object lessons.

Ghoulish Delight 07-20-2008 10:40 AM

I very much enjoyed it, but I think it fell short of the lofty heights of the first. It came together at the end, but lacked the cohesiveness that made Begins so brilliant. Plus, I fund myself thinking half way through, "Geez, this is reminding me of the Saw movies. Oh wait, that's right, Nolan's the Saw guy." While his brand of ever-more-complex clever traps certainly work for the character of the Joker, I felt Nolan put just a little too much of himself into it and it became more about how clever HE could be and less about the movies. Took me out of it and added tot he lack of cohesion as huge chunks of the movie felt like they weren't really serving any other purpose than to be clever. Contrasted with Begins where every moment of the movie served the purpose of the movie it was just weak.

But, as I said, it did come together in the end and overall it was great. Ledger ruled, Dent was great, better towards the end imo.

I never understood the Holmes hate in the first movie. It was a small role and she did a perfectly fine job with it. Gyllenhall bugged me quite a bit compared to Holmes.

Where Begins got 9.5 Girthies out of 10, this one comes in somewhere between 7 and 8.5, pending an eventual rewatch.

innerSpaceman 07-20-2008 11:23 AM

More than ever, I'm glad I never saw any of the Saw movies.


I had no idea Christopher Nolan had anything to do with those. Hmm.

Bornieo: Fully Loaded 07-20-2008 11:25 AM

The thing that bothered me most about the 89 Burton Batman was that the Joker died. If you grasp the 50 plus year history of the characters you know that when Joker dies, so does Batman because they are each other's direct opposite. So, I'm glad he didn't bite it in this film. For Batman to go on, the Joker needs too also in some way.

Two-Face was fairly accurate, though in the comic he was more of a playboy than what we saw in the film and his motivations didn't involve the death of his girlfriend. Originally, he was just another throwaway villian and he really didn't come into his own until the mid 80's, though he first appeared back in the 50's. In the comics he was scarred by acid. I think in Dark Knight they gave him alot more depth than the comics ever did.

:) Batman 101

BarTopDancer 07-20-2008 11:37 AM

I've seen the first 3 Saw movies, and didn't see a resemblance until GD mentioned it. I think it's a stretch, and the closest thing would be the
Spoiler:
detonators to the boat bombs
.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.