What is the last film you watched?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Not since Neville Chaimberlain has anyone been so wrong!

[Morlock 11]

Well, at least Chaimberlain had an excuse. I mean, honestly, when was the last time you even thought about Czechoslovakia?

[John Crichton 4]

Ah yes, Britan's great pre-war joke.

(Yes, that's a Python reference.)

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Well, at least Chaimberlain had an excuse. I mean, honestly, when was the last time you even thought about Czechoslovakia?

Recently, or before they split up?

[John Crichton 4]

Adam West brings the full range of his talent and charisma to bear, portaying brilliantly both the suave Bruce Wayne, love-struck, with a Russian womwen that will break his heart, and The Batman, the Caped crime fighter, employing both physical strength and deductive reasoning to stop the fearsome foursome's plan to destabilize world peace.

It is no surprise that West was on the shortlist to succeed Sean Connery as James Bond.

It's too bad Batman destroyed his career. Still, he has Family Guy now.

Solid direction by Leslie Martinson, with the scene were Batman tries to dispose of a bomb in a dock filled with nuns, mother's with babies, lovers in boats, ducks..

And don't forget Dutch tilts. Lots and lots of Dutch tilts.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

I think if West hadn't turned DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER down it might just be my favourite Bond. Now that's some quality camp.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Surely you mean Deutsche Tilts?

Or did you mean Dutch Tits?

[John Crichton 4]

Well, I think you'll find techinically...

....

...Sorry, were you saying something?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Ummm....

Yeah....

[Morlock 11]

mmmmmmm....lava lamps....

[Ollie 1,059]

I think it had something to do with boo....err bats....

[John Crichton 4]

"I'll be in my bunk."

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yeah.....

[Luke Skywalker 1,795]

their movement is hypnotic

8O

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Finally saw the Dark Knight.

The film generally met my expectations, although I think those hyping it as the greatest film of al l time are going too far.

Its not even the greatest comic book adaptation of all time. Far from it in fact.

and the action sequences were magnificently staged. Lucas needs to go to the Nolan school of filmmaking as far as I'm concerned.

Actually, I thought the action sequences were pretty mediocre throughout. A slight improvement over the ones in Begins, but still ineptly handled and tepid for most part.

boy is richuk wrong or what. Nolan is basically clueless on how to stage action, he doesn't know where to place his camera, when to go wide, when to go small. George Lucas knows alot more about action than Nolan does at this point. Action is one of the weaker attributes of TDK.

[Romão 2,274]

Finally saw the Dark Knight.

The film generally met my expectations, although I think those hyping it as the greatest film of al l time are going too far.

Its not even the greatest comic book adaptation of all time. Far from it in fact.

I greatly respect your opinions, but I am in total dissagreement. TDK is so superior to any other comic book adaptation that has come before, it's not even close. No other super hero movie can touch TDK in several of its departments. I know there are several Superman fans in this board and I still think it is a wonderful movie. BUt TDK is a such much more enthraling movie experience, I can't even compare them. They are not even in the same genre.

TDK may not seen by many as the greatest movie of all time, which it certainly isn't, but it is, IMVHO, my far, the best superhero movie ever made.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

I consider Superman: The Movie to be the genre's Godfather. I really wanted TDK to be its Goodfellas. It was not IMO.

boy is richuk wrong or what. Nolan is basically clueless on how to stage action, he doesn't know where to place his camera, when to go wide, when to go small. George Lucas knows alot more about action than Nolan does at this point. Action is one of the weaker attributes of TDK.

Exactly. You never really get a clear idea of who is standing where in relation to everyone else. Once in a while Nolan will stumble upon a really cool shot, like Batman crashing down on the car in the parking lot fight or the truck flipping over at the end of the chase but the lead up to those shots were just extremely mediocre and lifeless.

[Romão 2,274]

The second half really lowers my apreciation of Superman. It is just too silly.

[John Crichton 4]

If we must compare, The Dark Knight takes a huge hit for the score. But I think trying to compare Superman and TDK is a bit silly. Yeah, they're technically both comic book movies, but they take such radically different approaches it's really like looking at two different genres.

[Ollie 1,059]

You sir are correct.

But I still think Superman is the best superhero adaption.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Finally saw the Dark Knight.

The film generally met my expectations, although I think those hyping it as the greatest film of al l time are going too far.

Its not even the greatest comic book adaptation of all time. Far from it in fact.

I greatly respect your opinions, but I am in total dissagreement. TDK is so superior to any other comic book adaptation that has come before, it's not even close. No other super hero movie can touch TDK in several of its departments. I know there are several Superman fans in this board and I still think it is a wonderful movie. BUt TDK is a such much more enthraling movie experience, I can't even compare them. They are not even in the same genre.

TDK may not seen by many as the greatest movie of all time, which it certainly isn't, but it is, IMVHO, my far, the best superhero movie ever made.

first the bat isn't a superhero,

TDK, isn't even close to what Superman is. TDK is a very good movie, and a very good piece of entertainment.

Both are flawed films. Yet Superman is a perfect piece of film entertainment, it holds up over time, and its bolstered by a great central performance.

TDK is weakened by Bale who give only the 6th best male performance in the film.

Superman>TDK

Donner's Direction>Nolan's Direction

Reeve>Bale

Kidder>Jake's Ugly sister

Hackman>Ledger

Brando=Eckhart

Ford>Caine

Williams>Zimmer/JNH

Unsworth>Pfister

[Romão 2,274]

You lost me at the Hackman>Ledger comparision. Don't get me wrong, I consider Hackman to be the greatest American actor up there with Dustin Hoffmann, but Ledger's performance is much more memorable, relevant and challenging. Not a critique on Hackman in any way.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

You lost me at the Hackman>Ledger comparision. Don't get me wrong, I consider Hackman to be the greatest American actor up there with Dustin Hoffmann, but Ledger's performance is much more memorable, relevant and challenging. Not a critique on Hackman in any way.

Ledger's performance is still skewed by his death and the recent release of the film

Hackman's performance is legend. Its campy to be sure, but its brilliant. Its as challenging as Ledger's, he is nearly Superman's equal. Relevance has little to do with it. Hackman's performance has stood for 30 years, and will stand another 30. Ledger's most likely will, but we can only wait and see, and Ledger isn't even as good as Eckhart

[Romão 2,274]

Well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, Joe

[JoeinAR 1,949]

thats fine. Its always easy to disregard Hackman's performance as campy, but campy is not necessarily easy to pull of and still be menacing, which Luthor is.

One only has to watch as Reeve and Hackman feed off of each.

I keep thinking of that part where Superman says, is that how you get your kicks by planning the deaths of millions of innocent people. Lex replys No, by cause the death of million's of innocent people. Hackman's Lex Luthor is just as psychotic as Ledger's Joker, but on a different level, he's less chaos, and more cruel.

[Romão 2,274]

I did not mean to disreagard Hackman's performance in any way (as I said, he's one my favorite actors) and it is indeed apropriately campy. But performances are not a problem of Superman: The Movie. But the excessive campiness of the whole thing, specially in the second half, does not really sit well with me. I take comic book characters extremely seriously. Maybe too seriously. Superman is just too light. But I gladly concede the first 40 minutes are glorious and JW's music plays as symphony.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

my problem with the Dark Knight is its too dark, it lacks a sense of humor, and in a film like this which takes itself way to seriously, it really needs to take a wink at itself and it never does. TDK wants to be treated as if its a real crime drama, but by its very nature its not real at all.

[Romão 2,274]

I guess we have very polar perspectives regarding this sort of movies. BUt you are very coherent in your views, I can only respect that.

But IMHO, Batman is at his most fascinating and gripping when taken very very seriously.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

my other half and I've been discussing this. He's very partial to Ledger's performance, as am I. He agree's TDK is too dark, but he likes it more than I. He thinks Superman is often too powerful, other than Kryptonite, his only weakness is his love. His humanity. Batman on the other hand has little or no humanity, but he's far more vulnerable, and yet he's not.

Of course Bats weakness is the same as Superman's, or Spidey, the love of a girl.

[Romão 2,274]

With a character which is virtually capable of acomplishing pretty much any feat, it is perhaps best to root in a pulpy, carefully balanced campy style. Superman still works in his original setting, in a 30's period, yeat somewhat timeless and definitively more positive and brighter than the days we live in.

Batman is not an entirely likeable character. Some his actions are borderline autochratic. He can be admired in many ways and pitied in a few others. The character becomes all the more intriguing and relatable in a realistic setting, where we can feel the sacrifices he goes through to become what he is. Batman looses gravitas in a more fantasy-like setting, whereas I think the situation might be the complete opposite with Superman.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

I disagree, I think Superman works wonderfully in a realistic setting. Because we sometimes need a Superman, just like Gotham needs a Batman. The flaw, which you don't agree about Batman is it doesn't truely work in a realistic setting. Certainly not in America, no city would stand by for the criminal ongoings in TDK.

[Romão 2,274]

BTW, is any precendent in the US for long term vigilantism acitivities?

[JoeinAR 1,949]

not in a modern sense.

Batman would be in essence a criminal, as he was in the movie.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

The second half really lowers my apreciation of Superman. It is just too silly.

I think it actually manages to be lighthearted and yet still be serious enough for the drama to work.

[QMM 4]

I still can't stand Hackman's Luthor

[Bryant Burnette 654]

I love Superman, and I love The Dark Knight as well, and if I had to pick which one I thought was the better movie, I think I'd go with The Dark Knight. But I'd want to give it a while to mentally kick around The Dark Knight before I said for sure.

What I can say for sure is that Superman is an awesome movie. Okay, okay . . . there is some humor that doesn't work, but so what? I've never felt like a movie had to be perfect in order to be great, and whatever Superman might lose with those scenes of ill-judged humor (thanks entirely to the character of Otis, by the way; not Luthor himself), it more than regains with Reeve's performance, the Krypton sequences, the score, the lighting, etc. Entertainment doesn't get much more entertaining, in my book. And on the Hackman-as-Luthor subject, my opinion is that he's terrific. There are other ways the character can be played, of course, but he's about as good as anyone could be at playing Luthor that way.

Back to The Dark Knight for a moment. I simply do not understand some of the opinions that are labelling it as being "too dark." It's a dark movie, sure; a very serious movie, and a movie that has the courage to follow its dark themes to their logically dark conclusions. But -- with parts of his history aside, of course -- Batman is a very different character from, say, Superman. That darkness is written into Batman's DNA. So dark, yes. But "too" dark? I don't get that. What does it mean? What are you folks who are making that claim trying to say when you say that the movie is "too" dark?

Regarding the action scenes, I agree that from the standpoint of how some shots are framed, Nolan needs some lessons from Spielberg or Cameron or one of the other great action directors. But I think that the emotion of the action scenes in both Batman Begins and The Dark Knight is what Nolan cares most about, and on that level, the action scenes play very, very well. And if I'm emotionally engaged in what's going on, then I don't much give a damn about anything else.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

now I disagree on one point, I didn't find much emotion in the film. The more I think about it the more Bale's performance harms the film, he's a weak Batman. He's fine as Bruce, but he's clueless how to be the Bat, and in many of the action/running scenes it not even Bale. Its more than the bat growl, which btw is getting alot of negative publicity lately. TDK is too new, and to label it better than Superman at this point is premature. Superman turns 30 this winter. It still flys. it still soars. Will TDK hold up 30 years from now? Don't know, I doubt it will retain the intensity. With the lastest Apetow piece of trash drug film hitting theatres this week, there is nothing new I want to see, so this might be the weekend that Dave and I give the bat a 2nd shot, maybe at the IMAX.

One thing is for sure no one will be humming the music from TDK 30 years from now.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

My problem with Bale's Wayne/Batman is that there is simply no connection between the two sides of the character. We never get a proper shot of Wayne changing into Batman, and Bale plays Batman as a completely separate character to Wayne. Batman in TDK is just some guy in a suit who shows up at the right time.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

it should be noted that playing the bad guy in a film is much easier than playing the good guy, it always has been. The trick is to take it to the next level of villany.

Still Ledger's performance stands as a great villian, along side Mitchum, Hopkins, Rickman, Hackman, and Olivier.

And for those of you wondering thats Night of the Hunter, Silence of the Lambs(only), Die Hard, Superman, and Marathon Man. No disrespect to those I left out. Hey gives me an idea!!!

[QMM 4]

One thing is for sure no one will be humming the music from TDK 30 years from now.

Is that a slight against the movie?

The type of score that Williams did for Superman wouldn't be appropriate for TDK, nor would Elfman's style IMO

[JoeinAR 1,949]

that is such a cop out, the lamest excuse. Yes ?man its a slight against the film. Its score is as effective as the one in The Birds. This film cries out for a great score.

I disagree, I think Elfman's approach would work better than the sh!# Zimmer puked on the film. Zimmer is the Osama Bin Laden of film composers

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Stargate: Continuum.

Some will praise this movie for not being as bad as The Ark of Truth. Look no further than the SG-1 franchise if you want confusing plots, time paradoxes, time loops, time shoots, time poops, the list goes on. All I really remember from this movie was Claudia Black's boobs taking up the whole frame, and a few ships and planes blowing up. A lot of fans buying it will be creaming their pants at Richard Dean Anderson appearing for five seconds - he must have time traveled his way out of the movie just in time for tea! Michael Shanks as Daniel Jackson loses a leg, but prosthetic technologies in alternate timelines magically allow him to still manage to run around shooting Jaffa warriors while showing off his bulging muscles.

Joel Goldsmith even throws in a few Williams references here and there, you'll know when you hear them.

[Bryant Burnette 654]

now I disagree on one point, I didn't find much emotion in the film. The more I think about it the more Bale's performance harms the film, he's a weak Batman. He's fine as Bruce, but he's clueless how to be the Bat, and in many of the action/running scenes it not even Bale. Its more than the bat growl, which btw is getting alot of negative publicity lately. TDK is too new, and to label it better than Superman at this point is premature. Superman turns 30 this winter. It still flys. it still soars. Will TDK hold up 30 years from now? Don't know, I doubt it will retain the intensity. With the lastest Apetow piece of trash drug film hitting theatres this week, there is nothing new I want to see, so this might be the weekend that Dave and I give the bat a 2nd shot, maybe at the IMAX.

One thing is for sure no one will be humming the music from TDK 30 years from now.

I agree with you that calling The Dark Knight better than Superman is probably a little premature. Obviously, any really great movie -- which Superman undeniably is, in my book -- is only going to get better over the course of time, as repeat viewings allow the movie's nuances to fully play out.

But after seeing The Dark Knight twice, I do feel extremely comfortable saying that it's a great movie. Is it better than Superman? Hell, I dunno. Does it matter? Not really; not at all, except in the sense that comparing them gives people something to talk about. I've got a thirty-year love-affair with Superman, which I think I would've loved at any age, but it came out when I was four and thus was able to be a very important part of my imaginative life as a child. That's something that The Dark Knight can never compete against.

However, I find that certain types of movies can and do occupy a very similar place in my adult life. As far as I can tell from a limited amount of analysis, they tend to delve in one way or another into the complexities of what it means to be an adult. Certainly, The Dark Knight does this. Amongst other things, it's a movie about the incredible tension between what we want to be and the cost of being that thing. And on that level, I am utterly thrilled by The Dark Knight. It's a similar sensation to the thrills I got from Superman as a child; it's just coming from, and working on, a different place.

As such, I find The Dark Knight to be overflowing with emotion. I understand everybody in that movie; I know exactly what they want, and I have an appropriate amount of sympathy for the characters. I suppose that's why I like the score; because I'm responding to the movie emotionally, and I hear the score as a reflection of those emotions. Obviously, some people don't agree, and that's probably to be expected. But it seems that a great many people are responding emotionally; after all, that's where the desire to see a movie more than once seems to primarily come from.

Obviously, movies are a very important aspect of my life. They aren't that important to everybody; for a lot of people, they're just a way to pass the time. I have no problem with that; in fact, it makes perfect sense to me, and the most admirable movies are the ones which allow you to engage with them on either the one level (of pure entertainment) or the other (of a richer, more contemplative experience). Or, best and most admirable of all, they do both at the same time.

For me, both Superman and The Dark Knight are working at that most admirable level. Judging from the stellar reviews and the stellar box-office, I'm on very safe ground making that claim about The Dark Knight; and obviously, Superman has already proven itself, and will continue to do so for years to come.

Zimmer is the Osama Bin Laden of film composers

What an odd statement. I'm not quite sure what it means, but I'm thinking I probably disagree with it.

Joey, you seem unable to even accept the idea that somebody might like this score, almost as if it personally offends you. What a strange attitude that is. If you don't like it, so be it, but why does it bother you so much when other people defend it?

As stand-alone music, I think it's obviously aeons behind Elfman's Batman, but I think it fits the movie extremely well, and I frankly can't imagine the movie with a cartoonish score like Elfman's (which, in turn, fits its movie extremely well). Zimmer/Howard's score is taking a completely different approach -- it's telling us that we can forget about seeing the types of things we normally see in this kind of a movie. One thing I find that it accomplishes is to help ground some of the more unrealistic bits (Batman "flying" from one building to the other, for example) and help keep them from feeling out of place within the context of the rest of the film. I would certainly hate for every score to be like this one -- just as I'd hate for every movie to be like this one -- but I just can't find too much fault with what Zimmer and Howard did here.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Zimmer is the Osama Bin Laden of film composers

What an odd statement. I'm not quite sure what it means, but I'm thinking I probably disagree with it.

Joey, you seem unable to even accept the idea that somebody might like this score, almost as if it personally offends you. What a strange attitude that is. If you don't like it, so be it, but why does it bother you so much when other people defend it?

Because the more people like crappy scores like this, the more crappy scores like this we'll get.

[A24 4,333]

The greatest admirers of Superman The Movie are from an older generation. That's not a good sign. Perhaps the super hero film is the most vulnerable genre when it comes to aging.

[QMM 4]

well I loved JNH's scoring of Dent's last scene

[Bryant Burnette 654]

Zimmer is the Osama Bin Laden of film composers

What an odd statement. I'm not quite sure what it means, but I'm thinking I probably disagree with it.

Joey, you seem unable to even accept the idea that somebody might like this score, almost as if it personally offends you. What a strange attitude that is. If you don't like it, so be it, but why does it bother you so much when other people defend it?

Because the more people like crappy scores like this, the more crappy scores like this we'll get.

Thanks for explaining that, Joey.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

You're welcome, Hitch!

[Morlock 11]

I still can't stand Hackman's Luthor

He's still my favorite character in the movie. Although he might be the biggest problem. His camp brings into question the whole concept of Superman, when, at the end of day, one is supposed to buy into the myth. I never did.

The greatest admirers of Superman The Movie are from an older generation. That's not a good sign. Perhaps the super hero film is the most vulnerable genre when it comes to aging.

Oh, I think that it definately the case. They seem to be so much more of their time (and in recent years, so reactionary to other comic-book movies), and nothing unltimately dates a film like timeliness.

well I loved JNH's scoring of Dent's last scene

I loved it too. First class scoring. Although, like the rest of the score, even if it is JNH, it sounds a heck of a lot more like Zimmer.

Morlock- who has no great and passionate defense of the score, but who thinks it works, at times very well, and it's a very valid approach.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

Across the Universe

Finally saw it on DVD, after being unable to find a proper theatrical screening anywhere (and being unable to attend an upcoming open air screening later this month - damn).

It was fantastic. Everything I had hoped for and more.