Dark Knight

[W. Richmond]

The last 40 minutes of the movie were totally superfluous IMO. It crushed the momentum of the film for me.

[whtouche]

Originally Posted by Mr.MightyMouse

No twist or dance that this movie has , has not been formulated in the "Saw" trilogy, Coen Brothers extravaganzas, or previous superhero/action opuses such as "Treminator" .
The sown in cell phone, pool cue battle, and the hostage masquerade are "Saw" verbatim.

Heath Ledger, while absolutely brilliant, seemed to have mixed mannerisms from
Jim Carey's "The Mask", Al Pacino's "Devil's Advocate",Dustin Hoffman's Enrico "Ratso" Rizzo in "Midnight Cowboy" which later somewhat reappeared in "Rainman", James Cagney's "Public Enemy", and Robert DeNiro's "Angelheart" - not that there is anything's wrong with those inspirations.

You seem determined to see bits of other movies in this one. I wonder if that's the case for every movie. Specifically in response to your critique of Heath Ledger's Joker, you seem to be accusing him of being original, and then listing at least 5 and possibly SIX different performances he was mirroring. Don't you think a performance has to be considered pretty original if you have to piece together six other performances to add up to what you saw?

On your opining that Christian Bale stole the show from Heath ledger I have to respectively disagree. Sure, Bale's performance as Bruce Wayne / Batman was thoroughly convincing, I just think Ledger's Joker was on a whole other plane. It was right up there with the best performances of Johnny Depp, or Gary Oldman (who was again spectacular as Gordon) in that he completely lost himself in the role. Think about it: If you went to see this movie without knowing who played the joker, would you ever have guessed it was heath ledger? Would he even be on your list of 50 possible actors who played the role?

Sure, part of that is the makeup, but I think it owes a ton more to his performance.

Just my opinion.

[Mr.MightyMouse]

I just have tough time in imagining Bale's Bruce Wayne as the Batman, it is almost as they are played by a different actor, kind of like Alain Delon's Zorro.
BTW - Zorro was supposedly 1 of the 3 original Batman's inspirations.

Heath Ledger has been excellent in the past of transposing himself (and was a sponsor of experimental reality theater in Los Angeles) - although I can not bring myself to watch Brokeback Mountain, the Knight's Tale is mine favourite of his, especially with apropos use of AC/DC's "She Shook Me" and Bowie's "Golden Years". I did think that the Joker was brilliant and perhaps Oscar worthy - but some critics seem to raise his performance to best levels of Pacino, Bogart, Olivier, Brando, Dean, fill in the blanc - I am just not sure. Perhaps, I need to see it again (next week).
After reading Roger Ebert's review, I finally realized that his Joker was inspired by the Victor Hugo's novel I had as a kid, which in turn was based on a grotesque medieval practice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Laughs

As far as, Gary Oldman - IMHO (again only 1 man's opinion) his was one of the weaker performances - not on the level of State of Grace, Romeo is Bleeding, Dracula, or Immortal Beloved or even Harry Potter III - may be I have tough time seeing him as an "all around nice guy".

[D'Artagnan1673]

Originally Posted by Mr.MightyMouse

I'm not sure why?
Liam Neeson was excellent in BB almost on Ben Kingsley's level IMHO.
The 2 movies flow together quite well - a lot better than Keaton's escapades, I did really like Nicholson's Joker though, not as much as Ledger's.

I didn't explain myself well (kids crying, wife needing help). I was referring to which character was a better, more powerful villain. In terms of shere insanity, the Joker takes the cake, but there was a more subtle, refined evil in Neeson's portrayal.

[D'Artagnan1673]

Originally Posted by Mr.MightyMouse

I just have tough time in imagining Bale's Bruce Wayne as the Batman, it is almost as they are played by a different actor, kind of like Alain Delon's Zorro.
....

I know what you mean. It's the voice. There is no semblance between the two actors.

[Shi no Tenshi]

Originally Posted by D'Artagnan1673

I didn't explain myself well (kids crying, wife needing help). I was referring to which character was a better, more powerful villain. In terms of shere insanity, the Joker takes the cake, but there was a more subtle, refined evil in Neeson's portrayal.

Do you think that might just be because the Joker is neither subtle or refined? Nor should he be?

[D'Artagnan1673]

Originally Posted by Shi no Tenshi

Do you think that might just be because the Joker is neither subtle or refined? Nor should he be?

I prefer the more refined villain.

[Slacker]

I can hardly wait to see this film. I rented Batman Begins last night, just for an "appetizer". Guess I'll have to compare the two now! And I've been holding out for the new X-file movie, opening Friday. It almost seems anticlimatic. Anyone care to join me for an X-file party?

[OROD]

Originally Posted by Shi no Tenshi

Do you think that might just be because the Joker is neither subtle or refined? Nor should he be?

I just saw this yesterday... wow, great movie, but it was Heath Ledger that took it to new heights. So, really, I have to dissagree with the idea that the Joker was neither subtle nor refined. Did you actually see the movie? Every single time Ledger was on screen I couldnt take my eyes off of him. The way he moved, spoke,... everthing his face did, his eyes... just amazing. Honestly I cant think off the top of my head of another performance in any movie that comes close. It's just incredible how in a single scene you can look in his face and see insanity, vulnerability, humor, terror... a completely unhinged individual, but with a brilliant mind behind it pulling the strings. He doesnt even seem like a person at times, more like a force of nature unleashed on Gotham. Bring on the Oscar!

.

[D'Artagnan1673]

Originally Posted by OROD

I just saw this yesterday... wow, great movie, but it was Heath Ledger that took it to new heights. So, really, I have to dissagree with the idea that the Joker was neither subtle nor refined. Did you actually see the movie? Every single time Ledger was on screen I couldnt take my eyes off of him. The way he moved, spoke,... everthing his face did, his eyes... just amazing. Honestly I cant think off the top of my head of another performance in any movie that comes close. It's just incredible how in a single scene you can look in his face and see insanity, vulnerability, humor, terror... a completely unhinged individual, but with a brilliant mind behind it pulling the strings. He doesnt even seem like a person at times, more like a force of nature unleashed on Gotham. Bring on the Oscar!

.

Brilliant and insane? By all means yes!

[Shi no Tenshi]

Originally Posted by OROD

I just saw this yesterday... wow, great movie, but it was Heath Ledger that took it to new heights. So, really, I have to dissagree with the idea that the Joker was neither subtle nor refined. Did you actually see the movie? Every single time Ledger was on screen I couldnt take my eyes off of him. The way he moved, spoke,... everthing his face did, his eyes... just amazing. Honestly I cant think off the top of my head of another performance in any movie that comes close. It's just incredible how in a single scene you can look in his face and see insanity, vulnerability, humor, terror... a completely unhinged individual, but with a brilliant mind behind it pulling the strings. He doesnt even seem like a person at times, more like a force of nature unleashed on Gotham. Bring on the Oscar!

.

While Ledger's acting skills are subtle and refined, the Joker himself is not. As you described him: a force of nature. Since when was anything described as such subtle or refined?

I mean, I know hurricanes, tornados, and earthquakes are very subtle and all, but still.....

[OROD]

Originally Posted by Shi no Tenshi

While Ledger's acting skills are subtle and refined, the Joker himself is not. As you described him: a force of nature. Since when was anything described as such subtle or refined?

I mean, I know hurricanes, tornados, and earthquakes are very subtle and all, but still.....

Your definition of force of nature seems very limited.

To me, the Joker was almost like a personification of anarchy and the dark nature of humanity. We dont really know where he came from or what made him the way he is, just that he wants to topple and deconstruct all that makes civilied people, and civilization itself, tick. No, he's not like an earthquake or a tornado. And yes, he's much more subtle than your typical villain. He very carefully and methodically plotted to turn Harvey Dent from Gothams best into a demented maniac. He tried to get citizens to kill each other. He tried to get under Batmans skin and push him to his limits...

No, I guess you're right, he's not subtle at all.

.

[Shi no Tenshi]

Apparently you think anarchy is subtle as well. Also very refined. Even though the Joker tells you his manifesto: he's just formenting chaos, he isn't planning ahead. Yet you seem to think he did. The gambit of Two Face presented itself, and he used it. It wasn't something he wanted to do from the beginning.

[whtouche]

Originally Posted by Shi no Tenshi

Apparently you think anarchy is subtle as well. Also very refined. Even though the Joker tells you his manifesto: he's just formenting chaos, he isn't planning ahead. Yet you seem to think he did. The gambit of Two Face presented itself, and he used it. It wasn't something he wanted to do from the beginning.

First of all, you combined two actual-words to make a non-word (formenting). That's just quibbling tho.

On the topic of two-face, obviously the Joker's intention was not for half of harvey dent's face burned off, but you can't say definitively that his objective was not to turn Dent into a maniac. After all, he knew Batman would choose to save Rachel, which is why he gave the addresses where Dent and Rachel were held in reverse.

Third of all, if you don't see or understand the subtlety in the Joker and particularly Heath Ledger's performance, then your brain is operating on a far too obtuse level and you shouldn't worry about it, no offense.

[Shi no Tenshi]

Originally Posted by whtouche

Third of all, if you don't see or understand the subtlety in the Joker and particularly Heath Ledger's performance, then your brain is operating on a far too obtuse level and you shouldn't worry about it, no offense.

Originally Posted by Shi no Tenshi

While Ledger's acting skills are subtle and refined, the Joker himself is not.

I'm glad you read them all before you post. Apparently I should not trust your reading comprehension.

[whtouche]

It is impossible to have a debate with someone who has demonstrated a refusal to understand the topics at hand, or an inability to do so. You do not understand the word subtle. Here is a hint: It is not in the same dictionary you found "formenting".

[Shi no Tenshi]

Originally Posted by whtouche

It is impossible to have a debate with someone who has demonstrated a refusal to understand the topics at hand, or an inability to do so. You do not understand the word subtle. Here is a hint: It is not in the same dictionary you found "formenting".

You are absolutely right, except you fail to see the flaws you accuse me of in yourself. So it is. I call such a thing 'projection'. But by all means, keep harping on the typo.

[Cookeit]

This thread should seriously have a spoiler warning in the title or first post.. lucky for me I saw the movie before finding this thread.

The only mediocre thing I noticed in the movie was how stupid Bale's voice sounded when he was wearing the bat costume, compared to when he was just plain Bruce Wayne.

I mean sure, it makes sense he would want to hide his identity while wearing the suit.. but come on...