The Dark Knight

[yovargas]

Totally noticed it. It was a quietly brilliant touch.

[halplm]

Comic book geek alert. I'll use spoilery text so I don't have to worry if people don't want to read it:

spoilers:

Padme, as a fan of the comics, the point where he first told the story of his scars, really disappointed me. As we all know, such details of a person's life, can easily be used to trace an identity. One of the coolest things about the Joker in the comics, is that he has no identity. In all the years of his existence, he has never been given a name or previous life. He has always been "The Joker." Even the murderer of Bruce's parents was eventually identified and punished (one reason The Joker being the murderer in Tim Burton's movie was such a bad idea), but The Joker stands alone as one without a past.

This was further compounded, by what I thought was Batman being able to track down The Joker's fingerprints. However, as soon as The Joker changed his story about the scars, it all made sense.... Not only was none of it true, but it was sadistic and diabolical! Furthermore, they later verified that they had no way of tracking his past .

The only two quibbles I ended the movie with, were the look of Two-Face's coin, and his death. As for the coin, in the comics it has always been obvious that he scarred the second half of the coin himself. However, the use of the coin in the film far surpasses that difference, especially the fact it was defaced in the act that created his madness. As for his death, I only object to this, because Batman always makes such a big deal of saving even his enemies lives. He did it for The Joker, which I thought was brilliant. And one has to assume, he could have done somethin to save Harvey. However, it is a testiment to The Joker's victory over all of them, that Batman was desperate enough to act as he did.

That, and I've had two people claim to have seen him breathing even at the end.

Too me, the perfect ending, would have both Two-Face and The Joker in cells in Arkum Asylum, but given Ledger's death, I'm sure they didn't want anyone to think he would show up in a sequal. I fear we have seen the last of The Joker in this series of films... but that's probably for the best, as I don't see how this performance could be topped.

As for other details noticed, anyone notice The Joker wearing a "Vote for Dent" sticker when he was the nurse? I thought that was brilliant.

I also absolutely loved The Joker clapping with everone else when the mayor made Gordon commissioner.

[Padme]

I'd love to find a print of the nurse I thought it was brilliant.

[Hachimitsu]

Hey, Hal I noticed the details you mentioned

Spoiler:

The thing for Harvey is, he was dying anyway, he wasn't going to last long without those burns getting treated, most burn victims are usually put into isolation as they extremely susceptible to infection. Also they are kept out of the sun. Not to mention the dude was walking around with open wounds!!! Every move he made including, keeping the bandages off and gyrating in the hospital bed hastened his death. Even if he didn't fall, he probably would have been in a very grave state by morning doing all he did to exacerbate his wounds.

Probably in RL he would have been put in isolation bandaged and sedated so he wouldn't immediately get Rachel's death confirmed, and have time to calm down and heal.

I loved that the joker changed his story. Just to get a reaction out of people.

For another spoiler did anyone like the prisoner and the detonator scene on the ferry? Brilliant!!!

[WampusCat]

Yes, I loved that scene! Very suspenseful, with a twist.

[yovargas]

Oh, yes! The whole thing really, but that particular moment was a highlight of the movie.

[halplm]

Wilma, Two-face pretty much looks like that in the comics. His body survived, his mind did not.

but you can always bring someone back in comic movies .

[Padme]

I more I think about it the creepier The Joker was. Ledger did such a powerful proformance as the Joker, I have to wonder if perhaps he went in too deep. I Nicolson told him not to dwell on the role too much or something like that.

I will say Ledger's Joker really reminded me of Nicolson's Jack Torrance.

[solicitr]

Oh. My. Goodness.

Who woulda thunk a comic-book movie would have the most brilliant screenplay I've run into in years? I swear, allowing for the limitations of the mass market, there were resonances of Dostoevsky. I am still decompressing.

Query: do we approve of Wayne/Batman's self-imposed limit? Would Gotham be better off with one who can take upon himself the sin of what no-one else would willingly do?


SPOILER




The two ferries and the detonators was a very effective use of a gedankenexperiment familiar I guess to most who have taken an ethics course. It also shows up in game theory, and in practice as an interrogation technique (you separate accomplices, and tell each that he can save his skin by ratting out his buddy).

[halplm]

Sol, I think Batman's limits are an essential part of the character and story. He is constantly at war with his own rules as he is always capable of exceeding them, and always forced to abide by them.

The game theory aspect of the Joker's actions is one that makes the film so brilliant. In effect, he puts himself in a position where he can't lose, and at the same time Batman is able to defeat him... at least in that respect.

Overall, I think none of the charactes in the film would claim victory, other than the Joker, who obviously has a theory of victory that he can always meet .

As for the survailance question, I thought it was a little heavy handed, but in the end, was respectable

[sauronsfinger]

Warning: Major spoiler below - VtF

Saw it today at an afternoon matinee with exactly 12 other people in a very large theater. I love to see movies like that.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I would give it a 7. It was fast paced, well acted (with one exception which I will get to) and held my attention.

I greatly prefer the stylized Gotham City of Tim Burton. That was a city right out of a comic. This seemed part New York, part Chicago and what could have been many other places.

I have always liked the acting of Christian Bale since his excellent youthful performance in EMPIRE OF THE SUN and most recently in THE PRESTIGE. I do not think he was quite up to that level here but he was good in the limited way the role demanded.

Nolan is a good director and he did a good job.

Ledger was very good. Academy Award worthy???? Who knows? There are many films between now and next February when they announce such things. I thought he was much better than Nicholson making the Joker more of a believable character as opposed to just chewing scenery like JN did. The little thing he kept doing with his tongue was a wonderful touch.

I wish somebody would explain to the the appeal of the female lead Maggie Gyllenhaal. On the looks department, I would put her right in there with Uma Thurman - and thats not a good thing. She showed me nothing that would make me beleive two men could be so enratpured of her. She brought out no emotional response in me at all. I would have like to seen a more conclusive resolution to the Joker. But thats just me.

[Alatar]

Well thanks a bundle SF

Thanks very bloody much.




All through this thread I've avoided the spoiler tags and then in the middle of a general discussion with no tags you reveal a major plot point.

I am seriously pissed off with you right now.

Please edit so no other sap like me gets stung (and Mods, if he doesn't please do it for him)

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I added a spoiler warning at the beginning of the post, Al. I'm sorry that it was too late for you (and for me, too).

[yovargas]

Al, I know this is a major sore spot for you, but I think if you're going to read a thread like this and you strongly want to avoid spoilers, than it's probably up to you to request no spoilers. Just a suggestion.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

yov, I usually don't mind spoilers, certainly not the extent that Al does, but I was pretty taken aback to read something quite so major without any warning. Ideally, it should be possible to read a thread like this that is not specifically designated as a spoiler thread, and not have a major plot point revealed by surprise.

[Hachimitsu]

It wasn't listed as a spoiler thread so it was assumed to be safe to look at for the unspoiled. That is why I put my spoilers in white. I don't even think it's out in Europe yet.

to SF:Sometimes personality beats looks and Rachel seemed to have grown up with Bruce Wayne and worked with Harvey Dent, so they would have gotten to know a lot about her personally, the character was recast from Katie Holmes who played the same character in Batman begins. I don't think Katie Holmes could have pulled off the role. Maggie Gyllenhal is much better.

[Alatar]

Its not. I'm going on Thursday, Opening Night here.

And yes, unless a thread is marked spoilers, I assume spoilers will be in tags. I like to read general impressions, as do many I'm sure, and given that was the trend here, with spoilers clearly marked, I took it as being safe to read.

Guess not huh.

[solicitr]

Of course, I disapprove on principle of any director giving work to Maggie "we deserved 9/11" Gyllenhall.

[halplm]

perhaps a topic for a different thread, but one thing I've learned is that you'll miss a lot of good entertainment if you worry about actor's political leanings

Now, if they also happen to just be bad actors, I have no problem avoiding their stuff

[solicitr]

Oh, I'll still go. I *loved* Barbarella.......