The Dark Knight

0 Kudo

Author	Comment
happydude33		#101	[-]
(07/21/08 2:41 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	We have something in L.A. called the Arclight. It's a great theater- real ushers, no one admitted after the film starts, everyone is quiet and respectful and the ushers actually see to this. Since its in Hollywood they ususally have props from the films that are screening on loan in the lobby. So this weekend I got to see Batman's costume, one of the Joker's costumes, the clowns' masks from the robbery and the Batcycle up close and in person. Great time. They also have a theater called the Dome which is supposed to be their premium screen (in addition to smaller more conventional screens) and it sounds similar to Jeffrey's experience. It's an old fashioned Cinerama wrap around style screen and I refuse to watch anything on it. Unless you're directly in the center of the theater, and there aren't that many great seats, the sides of the screen that wrap around distort the image in all the corners. Bigger is not always better. I'm also kind of reluctant to see a movie like this in IMAX because I don't know that I could focus on hyper action projected that big.
Jeffrey Allen Rydell		#102	[-]
(07/21/08 2:47 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	Carl Eyesnheart wrote: The one IMAX experience I had was terrible. It was much like that Omniman thing you mention. I vowed to NEVER take in another Imax if it is anything like that. Just make sure it's not listed as an OMNIMAX or IMAX Dome theater, and you should have a fighting chance at a quality presentation. I've only seen THE POLAR EXPRESS in 'real' IMAX, and it was worth it. - Jeff
BijouBob8mm		#103	[-]
(07/21/08 3:05 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	I saw FANTASIA 2000 and T-REX BACK TO THE JURASSIC at a regular Imax theater, and the experiences were fantastic. If you go to see something at a dome theater, try to make sure it's a film intended for that particular format, as it really does make a difference.
gene phillips		#104	[-]
(07/21/08 3:06 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	I've blogged a partial review HERE: http://arche-arc.blogspot.com/2008/07/my-so-called-dark-knight-review.html
n0s4a2		#105	[-]
(07/21/08 3:25 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	Saw it last night. For those of you who haven't, save yourself a headache and skip it. Loud, obnoxious, over-long, jumbled, pretentious, self-consciously "dark" in the most immature sense and worst of all BORING. Heath Ledger is great and some of his individual bits are weirdly interesting (especially in relation to his performance in the much better directed "Brokeback Mountain"), but they're chopped into a collection of confusing "action scenes" and pseudo-philophical sturm und drang that signifies nothing. All hype and no substance, but people are eating it up.
Joe Karlosi		#106	[-]
(07/21/08 3:48 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	Saw it this afternoon. I thought Heath Ledger stole the show and was really terrific as The Joker, and it seemed like I couldn't wait to see him show up onscreen in another scene . But as good as he was, I think he was more exciting in the first half than the second. I still cannot stomach Christian Bale's "SCARY-VOICED" and growling Batman, though he makes a good Bruce Wayne. Too long a film, I agree, and of course all the usual overkill, messy handling of the plot, and neverending climaxes which make me more bored and confused rather than thrilled. I like Michael Caine in general, but not as Alfred. Above Average, that's about it. ---------------------- "It's MORE ... than a hobby!" Last Edited By: Joe Karlosi 07/21/08 4:40 PM. Edited 1 times.
Latarnia		#107	[-]
(07/21/08 4:32 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	n0s4a2 wrote: Loud, obnoxious, over-long, jumbled, pretentious, self-consciously "dark" in the most immature sense and worst of all BORING. Heath Ledger is great and some of his individual bits are weirdly interesting (especially in relation to his performance in the much better directed "Brokeback Mountain"), but they're chopped into a collection of confusing "action scenes" and pseudo-philophical sturm und drang that signifies nothing. All hype and no substance, but people are eating it up. This is what I say, and I haven't seen the film and have no intention to. I'm tired of whole "dark" comic book shtick with pseudo-analyzed "deep" characters who just happen to wear a bat mask or shoot spiderwebs from their wrist. Just like real life. Sure. I need light, which is why I may go and see MAMMA MIA. If I want dark, I'll watch a film noir or an Ingmar Bergman film. Mirek
indy81000		#108	[-]
(07/21/08 4:40 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	This is probably the best American film of the year so far. Certainly the best superhero film ever made, although I concede that its approach to the source material will not suit every taste. Almost all of the Marvel films now seem amateurish in comparison. I was riveted for the entire running time; much more than a film to satisfy fan boys, it's simply a great piece of genre cinema. It created a truly unsettling environment where I was genuinely anxious about what might happen next. The performances were uniformly excellent, although I was a bit surprised that Maggie Gyllenhaal was not an upgrade to Katie Holmes. No, it's no GODFATHER, but one gets a better grasp of Nolan's achievement if his film if is viewed as a similar kind of crime epic and not a superhero film with all the baggage associated with that sub-genre. There's already the inevitable backlash, but I think many of the film's critics are dismissing it without considering its more subtle merits, like the way it deftly interweaves the multiple character threads along thematic lines. The numerous critiques of the film's implicit politics or ideology also reveal its thematic depth (relative to American action cinema, of course). Arguments that the film is just another loud, dopey, shallow action picture seem wildly off-the-mark to me. I have minor criticisms here and there, but they're almost irrelevant considering the film's ambition. All and all, a pleasant return to the days when summer blockbusters were also great films.
BijouBob8mm		#109	[-]
(07/21/08 4:50 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	No, it's no GODFATHER, but one gets a better grasp of Nolan's achievement if his film if is viewed as a similar kind of crime epic So funny to read that; I saw the film on Friday, and on Saturday another CHFB member asked me if I thought his young kids would be OK with it. I told him that if they could handle a film along the lines of THE GODFATHER, they'd be able to deal with this (in terms of the violence).
modpro		#110	[-]
(07/21/08 5:13 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	indy81000 wrote: Arguments that the film is just another loud, dopey, shallow action picture seem wildly off-the-mark to me. I have minor criticisms here and there, but they're almost irrelevant considering the film's ambition. All and all, a pleasant return to the days when summer blockbusters were also great films. Amen, Indy! This film is a fantastic return to REAL storytelling in the service of a summer blockbuster film. If it's too dark and grim for you then you don't really have any understanding of the core of Batman: a man who dresses up as a bat and wars on criminals because he is haunted by his parents' violent bloody death as gunned down by one when he was just a small boy. Yeah, real light stuff, huh? Sam F. Park
happydude33		#111	[-]
(07/21/08 5:48 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	modpro wrote: indy81000 wrote: Arguments that the film is just another loud, dopey, shallow action picture seem wildly off-the-mark to me. I have minor criticisms here and there, but they're almost irrelevant considering the film's ambition. All and all, a pleasant return to the days when summer blockbusters were also great films. Amen, Indy! This film is a fantastic return to REAL storytelling in the service of a summer blockbuster film. If it's too dark and grim for you then you don't really have any understanding of the core of Batman: a man who dresses up as a bat and wars on criminals because he is haunted by his parents' violent bloody death as gunned down by one when he was just a small boy. Yeah, real light stuff, huh? Well, fans of Batman who didn't like it aren't wrong because it's a matter of taste. I happen to think its the easily the best movie of the year, but even if I could bake you the greatest cake ever made by the hands of man, you're not gonna eat it if you don't like cake. And believe me: If I could bake everybody here the most delicious cake ever, then rest assured, I would.
Dr Acula		#112	[-]
(07/21/08 6:13 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	The strengths of the film were Ledger's Joker (who is actually one of the better Joker incarnations, and twistedly dark humored), the Harvey Dent story, and a fair amount of the plot. I also agree with Joe's dislike of the Scary Batman voice - in fact, this Batman looks the worst outside of the 40's era serials. The other thing I disliked was the final set-up for Joker's plan with the ships... I thought that was the only plan that wasn't thought out well enough to work in real life (in particular, I would have jumped in the water and started for shore with the lengthy time between warnings and explosions). Of modern Batmen, I still prefer Burton's first crack at the character, but DARK KNIGHT is better than BATMAN BEGINS and a general cool film.
Joe Karlosi		#113	[-]
(07/21/08 6:18 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	Yeah, of the "modern BATMAN" films I prefer Burton's BATMAN. But I'm not so sure that Heath Ledger isn't rivaling Jack Nicholson's Joker for me at the moment. Both were very good, IMO. ---------------------- "It's MORE ... than a hobby!"
modpro		#114	[-]
(07/21/08 6:20 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	happydude33 wrote: Well, fans of Batman who didn't like it aren't wrong because it's a matter of taste. I understand what you are saying but my point wasn't about taste, but content and understanding the core story elements behind the Batman character. Batman sprang from a violent bloody beginning as a very grim pulp-type character who took on a frightening costume to wage war on violent criminals and became a "dark knight" in the process. That's the character as originally written and what has gained favor over the years as the comic books and other media returned to it. If your "taste" doesn't like that then do like Mirek and avoid this film. I didn't personally hate the 60s BATMAN TV series but I hated the camp fallout from it that it created for superhero projects for decades. At last we are getting "comic book" movies that reflect the serious growth of the comics medium and reach for something higher than acting embarrassed about being involved with something as juvenile as comics once were. Sam F. Park
Doctor Lamont		#115	[-]
(07/21/08 7:06 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	Is this the classic HORROR film board? I'm surprised to find this film being criticised for being too dark and creepy on this site. Over all the reviews here are much worse than the general public. I wouldn't have minded if the film had been even darker.
Jeffrey Allen Rydell		#116	[-]
(07/21/08 7:07 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	n0s4a2 wrote: Saw it last night. For those of you who haven't, save yourself a headache and skip it... ... but people are eating it up. Make sure you take n0s4a2's advice and skip it, though! - Jeff
happydude33		#117	[-]
(07/21/08 7:26 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	modpro wrote: happydude33 wrote: Well, fans of Batman who didn't like it aren't wrong because it's a matter of taste. I understand what you are saying but my point wasn't about taste, but content and understanding the core story elements behind the Batman character. Batman sprang from a violent bloody beginning as a very grim pulp-type character who took on a frightening costume to wage war on violent criminals and became a "dark knight" in the process. That's the character as originally written and what has gained favor over the years as the comic books and other media returned to it. If your "taste" doesn't like that then do like Mirek and avoid this film. I didn't personally hate the 60s BATMAN TV series but I hated the camp fallout from it that it created for superhero projects for decades. At last we are getting "comic book" movies that reflect the serious growth of the comics medium and reach for something higher than acting embarrassed about being involved with something as juvenile as comics once were. Mod, as I said I LOVED the movie. And I don't think you're wrong, because yes that was the original INTENT in regards to the character but even the earliest incarnations are nowhere near as dark as this current one. This is an interpretation. We might find that the zeitgeist turns in a campier direction somewhere down the line and then this version of Batman will fall out of fashion. Who knows? But I've heard the argument from both sides of the Star Wars fence for example (I know, shame on me for bringing it up) that you're not a true fan if you like the prequels and you're not a true fan if you don't. But by this argument, Jar Jar was part of the original creators intent so you're not a true fan of Star Wars if you don't like him. I don't think that's true- and for the record I love all 6 of those movies, ghastly warts and all. But my point is that somebody's not wrong for liking the Burton, the serials, or god help us, Adam West better than this latest effort. Now, somebody would be wrong for liking Rob Zombie's Halloween, but this is an argument for another time.
JimPV		#118	[-]
(07/21/08 8:23 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	indy81000 wrote: This is probably the best American film of the year so far. Certainly the best superhero film ever made, although I concede that its approach to the source material will not suit every taste. Almost all of the Marvel films now seem amateurish in comparison. I was riveted for the entire running time; much more than a film to satisfy fan boys, it's simply a great piece of genre cinema. It created a truly unsettling environment where I was genuinely anxious about what might happen next. The performances were uniformly excellent, although I was a bit surprised that Maggie Gyllenhaal was not an upgrade to Katie Holmes. No, it's no GODFATHER, but one gets a better grasp of Nolan's achievement if his film if is viewed as a similar kind of crime epic and not a superhero film with all the baggage associated with that sub-genre. There's already the inevitable backlash, but I think many of the film's critics are dismissing it without considering its more subtle merits, like the way it deftly interweaves the multiple character threads along thematic lines. The numerous critiques of the film's implicit politics or ideology also reveal its thematic depth (relative to American action cinema, of course). Arguments that the film is just another loud, dopey, shallow action picture seem wildly off-the-mark to me. I have minor criticisms here and there, but they're almost irrelevant considering the film's ambition. All and all, a pleasant return to the days when summer blockbusters were also great films. Very well put, indy81000, particularly when you said No, it's no GODFATHER, but one gets a better grasp of Nolan's achievement if his film if is viewed as a similar kind of crime epic and not a superhero film with all the baggage associated with that sub-genre. I would argue re: "the Marvel films now (seeming) amateurish in comparison", though. They're perfectly legitimate ways of approaching the material, IMO (as is TDK). I would agree, though, that TDK had an intensity that I haven't experienced with another "superhero" film. You're comparison of this to The Godfather or similar modern crime film was spot-on. And remember: this isn't just a "regularly" shot film that gets shown in Imax theaters. Six of the large-scale action scenes (including the opening bank heist) were actually shot with Imax cameras, which, as far as I know, is a first for a narrative, mainstream film.
Latarnia		#119	[-]
(07/21/08 8:23 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	modpro wrote: indy81000 wrote: Arguments that the film is just another loud, dopey, shallow action picture seem wildly off-the-mark to me. I have minor criticisms here and there, but they're almost irrelevant considering the film's ambition. All and all, a pleasant return to the days when summer blockbusters were also great films. Amen, Indy! This film is a fantastic return to REAL storytelling in the service of a summer blockbuster film. If it's too dark and grim for you then you don't really have any understanding of the core of Batman: a man who dresses up as a bat and wars on criminals because he is haunted by his parents' violent bloody death as gunned down by one when he was just a small boy. Yeah, real light stuff, huh? I read some of the earlier Batmans in reprint. Admittedly this was some time ago, but I never remember those stories as being unrelentingly grim--and certainly not populated by a Joker like the one we have in Ledger. Then, later (and still before the Batman TV series) a new aesthetic arrived and that Batman had none of the noirish qualities of the first Batman. To say that the newer movie versions of Batman get the core understanding of the character is, I think, very subjective and somewhat insulting to those of us who have a different idea of who the character is and what the Batman world should be like. It's just ain't the Batman I grew up with or sampled in the comics that were printed before I was born. This current Batman is a Batman for our time, I guess, but it's not a character I have any interest in, nor do I have interest in the "dark" world of mind and art design that he inhabits. Maybe I will next month or next year, but certainly not right now. This kind of cliched dark landscape that comic book heroes inhabit these days rings very false to me, as it seems sourced by a desperate need to make something "deep," as if a simple good adventure or mystery story is not enough, as if a simpler psycho-drama free character is an embarrassment to us sophisticates who demand depth. Well, yeah, but he's still a guy in a bat costume who, historically, has been battling guys in even more outrageous costumes, guys with names like The Joker, The Penguin, The Riddler, Two-Face, etc. You know, like those guys in the comic books. Mirek
Jeffrey Allen Rydell		#120	[-]
(07/21/08 8:41 PM) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite	Personally, I really enjoy the tension between a 'real' world milieu and a fantastical conceit finding flower in it. I think it's something that film is rather uniquely suited to putting across, actually. - Jeff

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

The Dark Knight

Quick Reply