The Dark Knight Rises

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Matt C is correct in some ways.

It's just that Ledger's performance lingers throughout the whole film. Making it seem hes'in more of it then he actually is.

Like Anthony Hopkins' Hannibal Lector, who got a Best Male Actor Oscar for basically a supporting role.

[A24 4,336]

There was an interesting chemistry between Hopkins and Foster. There was no chemistry in TDK, only mayhem.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

There was in interesting chemistry between Batman/Bruce Wayne and Harvey Dent/Two Face though.

People tend to overstate the TDK was not about Batman thing. It shows Batman exactly like he was in the comics. A dark, mysterious super detective.

[A24 4,336]

TDK doesn't feel like the Batman comic books. More like a depressive James Bond who thinks of retiring.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Alex, we all know you don't like the movie simply because it was too popular.

[A24 4,336]

No, I just don't see anything to root for. I liked the IMAX shots, but lets face it, Chicago isn't Gotham City.

[crocodile 8,017]

Aren't you a bit tired of Art Deco/Art Nouveau/whatever Gotham City?

Karol

[A24 4,336]

In BB, the city had a special (comic book) look. Now it looks normal. I have the same problem with Inception. It's a futuristic movie about dreams but it looks and feels like an ordinary James Bond movie.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

That was kinda the point.

[Brónach 1,302]

I agree.

I loved that Inception didn't go futuristic because it makes the dreams much more real, which was the point too.

There was an interesting chemistry between Hopkins and Foster. There was no chemistry in TDK, only mayhem.

That was kinda the point too.

Also, both movies feel like different comics on Batman. The third film should feel and look different to the first two.

The point and look of each film is basically explained in the opening logo. First we have a bunch of bats creating the bat symbol against an orange sky. Then we have the bat symbol emerging from wild blue flames. Now, what?

Apparently they're shooting in a different city this time. Hehehe.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

TDK doesn't feel like the Batman comic books. More like a depressive James Bond who thinks of retiring.

Which ones? I thought you didn't read them.

[Ollie 1,059]

Batman Begins was awful. I can't believe TDK was made by the same people, such a dramatic improvement.

[Jay 37,364]

Ok, there's no way The Joker was only in twenty minutes of TDK. No way

[Red 75]

In BB, the city had a special (comic book) look. Now it looks normal.

The only thing that's really different between Gotham in both films is that in Begins there was the Narrows and monorail, both of which where basically destroyed by the movie's end. The main portions of the city look more or less the same, which is the location shooting in Chicago with some subtle digital enhancements.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yep.

[crocodile 8,017]

What changes the perspective, I think, is that much of the action of TDK takes place during the day.

I for one am glad TDK looks the way it does. Simply because it is so different from the comic book feel. In my book this is what I call "fresh approach". And I think it makes for a more dramatic backdrop for Batman/Joker conflict.

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yep.

[A24 4,336]

The only thing that's really different between Gotham in both films is that in Begins there was the Narrows and monorail, both of which where basically destroyed by the movie's end. The main portions of the city look more or less the same, which is the location shooting in Chicago with some subtle digital enhancements.

It looked less normal to me. BB looked more dirty, smelly, messy and brown, like a sewer.

[crocodile 8,017]

Teenange Mutant Ninja Turtles must be particularly dear to your heart then?

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yep. In BB Gotham was a city rife with crime and corruption.

In TDK Bruce Wayne once again leads Wayne Enterprises, and probably cleaned it up a little bit (like his father build the monorail to develop the city). Also the organised crime syndicates have lost their vice-like grip over Gotham.

It makes sense.

Teenange Mutant Ninja Turtles must be particularly dear to your heart then?

Karol

Alex will never, ever admit it, but he loves that movie.

[A24 4,336]

Simply because it is so different from the comic book feel. In my book this is what I call "fresh approach".

That's what I miss, the comic book movie feel, and the fact that it wasn't about Batman. BB didn't copy previous Batman movies and yet the look was 'new' and different. It wasn't Chicago.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

Uh, TDK is about Batman's fall.

I'd argue The Dark Knight is more about modern society than about Batman.

[crocodile 8,017]

Simply because it is so different from the comic book feel. In my book this is what I call "fresh approach".

That's what I miss, the comic book movie feel, and the fact that it wasn't about Batman. BB didn't copy previous Batman movies and yet the look was 'new' and different. It wasn't Chicago.

The irony of it is... in the comic book the city doesn't seem half as "comic booky" as in the films.

Uh, TDK is about Batman's fall.

I'd argue The Dark Knight is more about modern society than about Batman.

That is, I think, what makes the film interesting. It actually tries to transcend its origins and puts a typical archetypical conflict against these unexpected canvas.

Karol

[A24 4,336]

I get that The Wire is about modern society but TDK?

[crocodile 8,017]

Alex, you have at least admit that it's rare enough for a film like this to try.

Karol

[A24 4,336]

Honestly, I think it's a morality play.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

It is.

[Brónach 1,302]

Gotham in TDK can be a perfectly valid Gotham for those who don't know Chicago, I guess

[Koray Savas 2,251]

They're shooting in Detroit for this film, as well as some other places, so definitely expect a different look.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

In this instance, I agree with Alex's negativity. The Dark Knight was mostly not fun to watch. One of my major issues is that Batman now sucks. Michael Keaton as Bats/Bruce had this quirkiness to him. A charm that made him likeable and easier to relate to. A hero to root for. You know, he still had his emotional issues and carried these great burdens, but he also had this average Joe-ness to him. Take, for instance, the scene where he goes to Vickie's apartment to apologize for blowing her off. He obviously has the ultimate excuse and she's nagging on and on. In this really surreal and hilarious moment, he's basically Batman without the mask and pushes her down in the chair and tells her to shut up. We've just all been there.

In TDK, Batman is the one nagging and clinging to that Rachel broad, who wasn't even that attractive and was basically leading him on. He's rarely, if ever, really on top of shit. Joker outsmarts him to the end, basically. Batman loses. Great. That was fun to watch. There isn't even a stalemate like Empire Strikes Back with that little ounce of happiness and hope to keep you from being plain depressed. It's a typically modern bleak outlook on society with a typical bleak and ambiguous/open ending. The villains were more interesting and memorable, but that's about it. Worst of all, it's not fun. You get only an occasional scene that isn't some convoluted dialogue or depressing plot development/boring twist to just sit back and take in a truck chase or Joker reveling in his badness. Batman wasn't cool anymore.

[Brónach 1,302]

Hence the title of the third film and the presence of Selina Kyle, the sexy antihero, in it. It appears to me that Nolan has pretty clear the whole arc of the trilogy in his mind.

I like that now only Gordon is going to help Batman and the rest of the police is tracking him down. I like that a lot.

[Matt C 454]

Ok, there's no way The Joker was only in twenty minutes of TDK. No way

I remember someone pulling all the Joker-centric scenes from TDK and posted them on YT. I've re-checked it again -- Ledger's scenes only make up roughly 35 minutes of screentime. Don't believe me? Here they are:

They're shooting in Detroit for this film, as well as some other places, so definitely expect a different look.

It's not certain they'll shoot in Detroit. Some rumors suggest that the new Superman movie will shoot in Chicago (I hear conflicting reports that it'll shoot in Vancouver instead), so that the studio doesn't want the shooting schedules conflicted if both Batman and Superman shoot in Chicago.

Uh, TDK is about Batman's fall.

I'd argue The Dark Knight is more about modern society than about Batman.

True. It's been a while since I've fully watched the film, so my memories are a bit rusty.

[Delorean90 42]

In this instance, I agree with Alex's negativity. The Dark Knight was mostly not fun to watch. One of my major issues is that Batman now sucks. Michael Keaton as Bats/Bruce had this quirkiness to him. A charm that made him likeable and easier to relate to. A hero to root for. You know, he still had his emotional issues and carried these great burdens, but he also had this average Joe-ness to him. Take, for instance, the scene where he goes to Vickie's apartment to apologize for blowing her off. He obviously has the ultimate excuse and she's nagging on and on. In this really surreal and hilarious moment, he's basically Batman without the mask and pushes her down in the chair and tells her to shut up. We've just all been there.

In TDK, Batman is the one nagging and clinging to that Rachel broad, who wasn't even that attractive and was basically leading him on. He's rarely, if ever, really on top of shit. Joker outsmarts him to the end, basically. Batman loses. Great. That was fun to watch. There isn't even a stalemate like Empire Strikes Back with that little ounce of happiness and hope to keep you from being plain depressed. It's a typically modern bleak outlook on society with a typical bleak and ambiguous/open ending. The villains were more interesting and memorable, but that's about it. Worst of all, it's not fun. You get only an occasional scene that isn't some convoluted dialogue or depressing plot development/boring twist to just sit back and take in a truck chase or Joker reveling in his badness. Batman wasn't cool anymore.

I see what you're saying but I disagree somewhat. What you're talking about here is why I didn't grasp how people could possibly be satisfied with BB/TDK as a two-film arc/series and just leave it. Not every film has to have a happy ending or anything, but leaving Batman in the mess he's in at the end of TDK goes beyond even the status quo of the comics in terms of desperation. It absolutely feels like the dark middle of a trilogy--like ESB. However, I think it does have a bright spot--the truck chase. Batman rescues Harvey Dent, Gordon is revealed to be alive (of course, none of us believed he wasn't, but the reveal is cool), and the Joker is stopped in spectacular fashion. Really, while the lack of scoring kind of worked for me in theater, this is the reason why I felt that there should've been, not only more scoring, but some really exciting, triumphant scoring. That sequence should be to TDK what "Rebirth" is to Poltergeist. It's one of my favorite--probably the favorite--sequences in the film.

[Melange 446]

After a Dark Knight, perhaps 'Sunrise' would have been more fitting

Or perhaps - "The Knight who says....NI!"?

Followed by - "The Knight who says.....Icky-Icky-Icky-Icky-Kapang-Zoop-Boing!"

[Charlie Brigden 7]

I still think, despite the grimness of it all, TDK is still great fun. There's some great action (the beginning appearance, the HK stunt, the batpod, the fear stuff), and obviously Ledger is a great laugh.

But in terms of "Batman not being on top of shit", that was the whole point of TDK, escalation to the point where Bruce needed to be tested on whether he could handle it. He was on top of everything at the beginning to the point where even the low-grade dealers are scared of him, but the equilibrium he established was immediately shattered by the appearance of the Joker as a metaphor for chaos. This taught Bruce that he had to take his actions to a new level, and that he had to go places he didn't want to go to stop him. That heroicness isn't just diving off a building or driving the Batmobile really well, but sacrifice.

[A24 4,336]

But in terms of "Batman not being on top of shit", that was the whole point of TDK,

But the film didn't do a lot with it. We didn't get into the psyche of Batman. A failed opportunity. It only showed that, should Bats think of retirement, Chicago city will be in mayhem because crazy villains are waiting for him to take a step back. Oh, yes, we learned (again) that the Bats has a code and that the Joker does not have a code for his actions. Oh, if only the Joker didn't forget about the goodness of humankind.

[crocodile 8,017]

I never thought this film was about Batman loosing or being depressed. I thought this is about him growing up and learning his self-invented, one-dimensional heroism is strangely inadequate to the world he's living in. And that the desire for clear-cut triumph will only lead to his downfall. Harvey Dent being The White Knight, falls into this exact trap. I think that up to this moment on his story, Batman thought of his own crusade in a very egocentrical manner. In a sense that he was doing what he was doing to earn his dead father's respect and to make use of his own life. I think the film is about him learning that there is more to that. And yeah, the film is very much about him, contrary to what people say.

That's how I see it. I understand some people might not like for a Batman film to follow this path, but that's clearly the intention. Batman is facing grey reality. The Michael Mann-like setting is a part of that. It can't be more obvious than that.

And that's why I'm not that excited about the third film. For I'm not sure where you go from there. Thematically, that is. Because you can multiply villains to no end.

Karol

[Neimoidian 14]

And that's why I'm not that excited about the third film. For I'm not sure where you go from there. Thematically, that is. Because you can multiply villains to no end.

Karol

That's my concern too. If TDK was Batman's Empire Strikes Back-kind of sequel, then TDKR might be Return of the Jedi, which means going back to the roots of Batman Begins. I hope Nolan isn't going to take that route.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I really doubt that. ROTJ was what is was because Lucas wanted to sell more merchandise. So we had a whole range a child-friendly fuzzy characters.

For a long time Nolan was even unsure he wanted to do a third one. I'm sure he committed to it because he saw the possibility of a good film, not a marketing tool for a toy range.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

C'mon, you've gotta make it more toyetic.

[Neimoidian 14]

Anne Hathaway's Catwoman 1:1 doll would definitely be an instant buy.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

However, I think it does have a bright spot--the truck chase. Batman rescues Harvey Dent, Gordon is revealed to be alive (of course, none of us believed he wasn't, but the reveal is cool), and the Joker is stopped in spectacular fashion. Really, while the lack of scoring kind of worked for me in theater, this is the reason why I felt that there should've been, not only more scoring, but some really exciting, triumphant scoring. That sequence should be to TDK what "Rebirth" is to Poltergeist. It's one of my favorite--probably the favorite--sequences in the film.

Yeah, that's one of the few extended scene from the movie I really like. Even the opening is pretty good where the gang robs the bank. It's just FUN. I can get into it. Frankly, I've had enough of Christian Bale as Batman. He plays the same dull uncharismatic guy in every movie nowadays and Batman is no exception. He just talks in a silly voice.

*throws detonator out window in heroic, but stupid, fashion*

[Luke Skywalker 1,795]

I really doubt that. ROTJ was what is was because Lucas wanted to sell more merchandise. So we had a whole range a child-friendly fuzzy characters.

For a long time Nolan was even unsure he wanted to do a third one. I'm sure he committed to it because he saw the possibility of a good film, not a marketing tool for a toy range.

i heard WB agreed to finance inception in echange of nolan making a 3rd batman fill.

is this gossip?

[Brónach 1,302]

No they agreed to make the film that eventually became Inception before TDK. After the success of TDK Nolan received carte blanche and he went with Inception.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

i heard WB agreed to finance inception in echange of nolan making a 3rd batman fill.

is this gossip?

Not very likely. Nolan had a HUGE hit with TDK, like properly huge. Any studio would have been lining up to finance any movie we wanted to do, regardless of a third Batman.

[Luke Skywalker 1,795]

i heard WB agreed to finance inception in echange of nolan making a 3rd batman fill.

is this gossip?

Not very likely. Nolan had a HUGE hit with TDK, like properly huge. Any studio would have been lining up to finance any movie we wanted to do, regardless of a third Batman.

You are nolan's production team?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Right now, I wish....

[Luke Skywalker 1,795]

aw sorry for reminding you that :/

[Koray Savas 2,251]

And that's why I'm not that excited about the third film. For I'm not sure where you go from there. Thematically, that is. Because you can multiply villains to no end.

Karol

That's my concern too. If TDK was Batman's Empire Strikes Back-kind of sequel, then TDKR might be Return of the Jedi, which means going back to the roots of Batman Begins. I hope Nolan isn't going to take that route.

This is the last film by Nolan, which is an interesting fact. Will WB tarnish his trilogy by continuing in the same universe without him and other actors, or will they start fresh again?

I'm just glad Nolan can get now work on some more personal projects. I want another drama, like Insomnia or Memento.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

Damn, you edited your post. Attempt at being patronising missed.