Messages

I've only started collecting Batman graphic novels within the last two years, but as a kid I had a Batman vs. Predator comic.  My modest Batman collection now consists of:

The Batman Chronicles Vol. 1:  1939-1940
The Dark Knight Returns
Batman Year One
The Killing Joke
Arkham Asylum
The Long Halloween
Dark Victory
The Knightfall Trilogy
Hush Vols. 1 & 2
Batman: Gotham By Gaslight
Justice League:  Tower of Babel (Only because its Batman centric)

I'd like to get Strange Apparitions, Batman: War on Crime, and Haunted Knight, to consider my collection complete.   Any recommendations on others?

Yes, please do. If one of the Joker's deserves an Oscar for their portrayal, it is certainly Ledger over Nicholson in my view.

As I've seen more and more of Nicholson's performances outside of B89 like Witches of Eastwick, his Joker seems more and more like Jack with Joker make-up.  Now I love Jack's Joker, but Ledger one-upped him.  If you compare the two, most would easily recognize the actor who played the Joker in B89 even if they had never seen the film but was familiar with Jack's body of work, I don't think it would be the same with Ledger's Joker.  

For me, Oscar worthy means someone who completely emmersed themselves in the role, so much so that you forget who the actor is and lose yourself in his/her portrayal.

I would've thought by saying "Ledger's performance... doesn't merit an Oscar nomination", I would've made my views quite clear.

Also, the issue at hand (for some reason) is whether or not Ledger deserves an Oscar, not whether Nicholson deserved one.  While I don't remember what else came out in 1989, I venture that he didn't deserve an Oscar either.

I'll close by saying that if Ledger does somehow win an Oscar for TDK, it'll be entirely a sympathy vote... unless Oscar season REALLY sucks this year.

Nope, not clear at all.  Just curious about the criteria you use to judge who you think is worthy of an Oscar.  You said Ledger did not deserve one, but never said why you thought that. 

And if he does win, you think it will be "entirely" based on sympathy?  You are saying that no one, and I mean no one will want to recognize his performance?  I don't buy that for a second.

Bringing this back on topic somewhat, I saw the movie again yesterday and while I still think highly of it, I maintain that Ledger's performance (while exceptional) doesn't merit an Oscar nomination.

Please explain

Favorite scenes:

Every scene with the Joker.  The Tumbler ramping into the parking garage, "loitering," and "intimidating."  Batman landing on the Scarcrow's getaway van.  Batman gliding, folding his "wings" and crashing through windows.  Batman dragging Lao out of his own building by his foot.  Bruce taking down the Joker's thug on his way to the "panic room" after the Joker crashes Dent's fundraiser.  Batman telling the Joker, "Then you are going to like me." The Batpod sequence.  The interrogation scene.  Batman looking down at the rubble, after Rachel's death.  "Bat-sonar."  Batman killling Dent and saving Gordon's son.  Gordon's speech at the end.

Acting:

Ledger was phenomenal.  Gyllenhall was a huge step up.  Eckhart was likable.  Bale, Freeman, and Oldman were solid as ever.

Pacing:

Liked the quicker pace.  It didn't feel like it dragged on like BB did in some places.

Score:

I bought the score before seeing the film and didn't sense anything really different aside from a couple of tracks and was disappointed, but in the context of the film I thought it was great.  It seemed to capture the theme of escalation well as the themes laid out in BB were taken up a notch.

Yes. Let me add that even though I have been going into a tirade against Burton, it can be said to be a defence mechanism against the Nolan criticism.

This happened to me a few years ago when I was searching for any news on a BB sequel and found BOF.  I thought for sure the people there would be excited about BB but still respectful and appreciative of the Burton films.  Instead I found a Burton bash fest.  So even though I enjoyed BB, I became a "Burtonite" by default even when I didn't know what a "Burtonite" or "Nolanite" was.  These days, with some of the unfair criticisms TDK has received from some Burtonites (not neccessarily from these boards), I find myself being pushed towards the center as I love both B89 and TDK (TDK slightly more at this juncture). 

I suppose the moral of the story is trying not to fall into the trap of taking criticisms of one's beloved Batfilm too personally and try to appreciate elements in both Batfilm incarnations.  Maybe the key to unification is to focus on things the two sides have in common, a disgust for the Shumacher debacles

I like the Burton films, but I will not stand by and take criticism of The Dark Knight.

It is evening up the wager. I have found some faults with Burton. It is creating some debate on this thread. It is called rebutting.

I think you are taking any criticism of TDK a bit too personal.  You know where I stand on TDK, and like you, I have been baffled at times at some critiques of it, but you have to understand that even though you really like apples and think they are the best fruit ever, some are still going to like oranges and thats more than ok.  Heck, if everyone agreed on everything this would be a very boring place. 

On a side note, I hope you do stick around.  These boards will always have a strong Burton lean to them and thats a good thing given the current Batfilm environment, but I think they still need a few Nolanites to keep things from getting too stale.

A D+/F?  Wow, thats BF and B&R territory.  Its a well written review, but I respecfully have to disagree with its conclusion.  This will probably get my Burton card revoked, but I believe TDK edges out B89 as the best Batman film ever, and arguably is the best comic book film/superhero film to date.  I believe the TDK compexity and depth is phenomenal.  A "popcorn" movie?!? With themes regarding whether morality itself is merely a societal driven trait, whether a society should give in to the demands of a terrorist, how far should a society go to protect itself from a terrorist, whether a man should take the fall for another's failings inorder to preserve a society's trust in a leader, whether there is something more than being a hero, etc., etc..  A simple, thoughtless, "popcorn" movie, I couldn't disagree more.   

I'd give the film an A or A- for being the closest you can get of the modern Batman comic books on screen, as well as a comic film that is very entertaining, at the same time being a selling point for Batman to casual viewers due to its serious tone and non-comicbook look. It's like Batman getting the "Singer's X-Men" treatment. Films like Batman Returns feel like fragile creations one has to protect from unwanted eyes (as a reviewer 16 years ago put it), this one feels like a mammoth you can endorse.

Excellent points.  Just as B89 was the closest you could get to Bob Kane/Bill Fingers' Batman on screen, TDK is the closest you could get to modern Batman on screen.  I consider both films to be the definitive versions for thier historical eras.  Not only that, I consider both films to be vitally important not only to the character himself but for the genre of comic book/superhero films as well.  B89 forced the mass public to see Batman as he was meant to be, dark and serious.  B89 also showed the potential of comic book/superhero films, which Spiderman, X-men, Iron Man, Hulk, and others now exploit.  As for the TDK, it pushed the Batman envelope a little further and higher.  I think it is a truly transcendent film, one that pushes the superhero genre into the realm of credibilty and respect.  In other words, people are more likely to take them seriously and appreciate them more.  But above all, TDK puts Batman at the center of the proverbial universe.  People are not talking about Superman, Spiderman, or some other superhero, they are talking about Batman, and unless you would rather Batman fans be a small, shadowy cult, all Batman fans should appreciate what TDK is doing in expanding the fanbase and Batman's appeal. 

If The Dark Knight gets to $300 Million by next week, it's a no-brainer that the film will make an estimate of $450 million by the end of its 14 week tenure in theatres. I mean, who wants Shrek 2 as the 3rd largest grossing film ever, TDK deserves that spot.  No movie has or will ever defeat the box-office success of Titanic. The film made 600 million in the US alone. It's just never going to happen with any other movie, unless the movie has some type of miracle script, actors, direction, etc.

Yeah, I think around or a little over $450 million in the U.S. is about right I think.  The distribution guy for Warners thinks it will hit $400 million in 18 days.  I really hope I'm wrong, but it will be tough to beat Titanic.  Nothing would make me happier though .

I too have noticed "nods" to Burton in Nolan's two Batfilms you mentioned.  I don't think Nolan is trying to out do Burton at all, if anything these "nods" are ones of respect to THE most important Batfilm ever.  B89 changed the way the mass public viewed Batman.  It for the most part erased camp from the Batman vocabulary from the 60's/70's until the Shumacher films brought it back.  In a similar way, BB tried to change the way the public's view of Batman away from the camp of Shumacher's B&R and towards a more serious and respectful tone.  I think both films had similiar missions to reenergize the franchise and make it more respectful to the character, and both were/are successful, but just done in a different way.  I could be wrong, but the only things I've heard or read about Nolan's take on previous directors was regarding Shumacher's nipple suits, not necessarily any of Burton's stuff.

On the "nods," point, anyone noticed that as Batman glides over the Narrows in BB and the people below are hallucinating, that it looks like the Batglider that Batman uses as he soars over the square in BR after the Ice Princess fell.  Maybe Nolan likes BR too       

Based on Bruce's reaction, I'd say that Bruce did not plan for Harvey to take the fall.  He was planning to step up when Harvey said, "Arrest the Batman." but he stops in shock as Harvey says, "I am the Batman."  Rachel couldn't believe that Bruce "just stood there" and let Harvey take the fall or she misunderstood and thought that Bruce had planned with Harvey to do that.  I'd have to rewatch.

Thats what I thought, but I've seen it twice now and still wasn't sure.  Thanks.

Also, did Harvey know Gordon was alive all along or not?

No, Batman used Gordon's death to shake sense into Dent (talked about Gordon's death being in vain) when he was interrogating the fake cop.

Also Gordon opened the van door and Dent was surprised to see him saying "Gordon! You do like to play things close to the chest."

Thanks, I missed those.