Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic

awesome movie, man who r they gonna get to play the next joker!, ledger was the best and probably will always be the best joker of all time.

Quote (laszlow @ 23rd July 2008 02:44)

Look, I believe you, but I also can't completely agree with you.  Burton's first film had too many goofy jokes, too many one-liners, and too many "brighter" differences from The Dark Knight not to have drawn more inspiration from the West show and from the earlier comic books.  Calling his first Batman movie "continuing a dark tradition" is a bit of a stretch when you compare it to Year One or The Killing Joke.

But I definitely agree that Nolan's interpretation is influenced by Burton's movies and that Ledger's Joker is inspired by Nicholson's, because, well, they have to be.  Both of those are too huge and too memorable not to.  Ledger made the Joker his own, but I think he specifically stated he deliberately took the Joker in a direction away from Nicholson's so he wouldn't make a mockery out of an actor for whom he had so much respect.  That makes sense to me, both because it's apparent onscreen and Nicholson's a great actor.

True, about Ledger intentionally distancing himself from Nicholson. He did say that in an interview, which I think was in response to an interview in which Nicholson said he was "pissed" that they didn't ask him for input on casting the Joker. But he also said in other interviews that he was influenced by Nicholson as well; he definitely took it in his own direction, but there's no denying it was influenced by a lot that came before it - including KJ, DKR, and Nicholson.

I guess there was more camp in Burton's Batman, but a lot of that came from the Joker himself. The last line of Batman movies only really went campy after Schulmaker took over. I think for sure Burton, in Batman and Batman Returns, continued the dark tradition of that Batman era. Think of Danny Devito's Penguin, or even the gruesome deaths that occur in the first Batman - Burton's Batman even killed the villains (which I think actually stepped too far away from Batman's comic morals - the one thing he doesn't do it kill - but still shows the dark intent of those movies).

I thought that Tim Burton's Batman flicks were pretty overtly dark, if not atmospherically, at least thematically and visually. I thought that the first two movies featured villains that were admittedly somewhat camp, but well within the range of twisted and gruesomely humorous.

If anything, Batman Returns was almost ridiculously darkly stylized. Between various strange and unusual scenes, settings, and characters, the movie was, in a word, very "Burton". And I think that in and of itself implies at least some sort of darkness. I don't think we need to necessarily equate somber, heavy drama with darkness. The Dark Knight was just heavy on the former while Burton's Batman movies focused on a more nonsequitur form of dark.

And I hope to God that they never use the Joker again in a Batman feature film. What a terrible idea that would be.

--------------------

I find your lack of faith disturbing...

Arright, I see where both of you are coming from. We probably can't completely agree, though, based on our own interpretations of the films and comics themselves.

And I'm totally with you, Kaps. The Joker needs to be retired in live-action film, if only to honor Ledger and his incredible performance. Anything else might be deemed as completely inferior, unless it was something like fifteen or twenty years from now.

--------------------

this is a blog mostly about comics and videogames
END SPOILER

I really enjoyed TDK, I will go see it again in fact this weekend. I am hoping since its making alot of money that it can beat Titanic for the #1 spot.

As much as I'd like to see the Joker retired out of respect for Ledger, the Joker is probably too iconic a character for that to be possible. That doesn't mean that the random schmuck who has to play him next won't have some incredibly big clown shoes to fill, of course, because Ledger's Joker was like id personified.

Hell, the whole moral exploration in the film helped put it a notch above a run-of-the-mill action or superhero movie. Even when the characters got talky and ran the risk of filling up their scenes by trying to say something important, their stuff ended up sounding so... relevant. Harvey Dent was such a tragic hero, even when he wasn't towards the end.

And the whole scene with the two boats was fantastic. I had an inkling as to how it would end, but it still managed to be genuinely suspenseful, and the resolution was probably one of my favorite parts in the film (apart from the Joker in the hospital).

my friend and i were talking about possible candidates for the next joker. what we came up with was either daniel day lewis, or johnny depp. i said johnny depp because he's really versatile and can play a ton of parts. go watch pirates 3, then willy wonka, then edward scissor hands and tell me he isnt versatile. my friend said daniel day lewis because hes a terrific actor.

--------------------

Aujourdhui a commence avec toi.

Seeing at second time made it an interesting experience, knowing more what could happen as well made a difference.

I think everyone missed the point about what I was saying about the Joker in future films.

I couldn't care less about "respect" given to Heath Ledger for his role and death as Joker. What I'm saying is that making another Batman movie with the Joker as a central villain is nothing short of tacky. Overdone, beating a dead horse, completely unnecessary. Batman has a plethora of viable villains over the course of numerous quality storylines. Seeing the Joker again would just be unoriginal and uninspired. It's just icing on the cake that Ledger made himself such a hard act to follow.

And I agree, the second time around it was a totally different experience. While the initial shocks and thrills weren't as intense, the little details really stood out. I still loved it.

--------------------

I find your lack of faith disturbing...

Quote (Kappa the Imp @ 29th July 2008 13:10)

I think everyone missed the point about what I was saying about the Joker in future films.

I couldn't care less about "respect" given to Heath Ledger for his role and death as Joker. What I'm saying is that making another Batman movie with the Joker as a central villain is nothing short of tacky. Overdone, beating a dead horse, completely unnecessary. Batman has a plethora of viable villains over the course of numerous quality storylines. Seeing the Joker again would just be unoriginal and uninspired. It's just icing on the cake that Ledger made himself such a hard act to follow.

And I agree, the second time around it was a totally different experience. While the initial shocks and thrills weren't as intense, the little details really stood out. I still loved it.

I was on the edge about seeing it a second time, but I think I will now. It'll be alot like watching The Sixth Sense again, I reckon. I know all the surprises, but this time I can focus on all the finer details..... all the "red objects", if you will.

--------------------

Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

~Pacifist Badge, 1978

I don't like Batman as a character. But, when I see a story that is well done and speaks of the character he is, I can completely get behind it. I loved this movie. They got it so right.

I'm one who is always analyzing things, always looking for subtext, so I was kind of pissed at myself for not catching on to the fact that they were calling Harvey Dent "The White Knight" of Gotham until probably the third time they used the term.

And, at the ending:

Possible spoilers: highlight to view

When Batman decided to take the blame for Dent's crimes, it spoke so well to the character. They mentioned the whole thing about how he did it so Gotham could have its hero without clay feet. But that's not why he did it. Batman is a strategist through and through. Saving Dent's image was not his goal, it was how he set to achieve his goal. Just before he went on about Gotham needing its hero, he said to Gordon, "The Joker can't win." That is why he did it. When faced against the Joker, Batman must not only stop him, but defeat him. Because with the Joker, it's personal. It's not about keeping people from being hurt, it's about keeping the Joker from hurting people. Only the Joker can do that to him, can make him strip away his view of the violence and crime and focus on the battle that exists between him and the Joker. That is what sets the Joker above all his other villains.

Quote (leilong @ 22nd July 2008 13:36)

In more recent years, Batman has gone more from a Comic to a Graphic Novel,

Reading that makes my head hurt so bad.

--------------------

"I had to write four novels before they let me write comic books."
-Brad Meltzer

I just went and saw it with my wife tonight.

Very very dark movie. I enjoyed it, but... I don't know. It was just hard to watch for us.

BTW, as we were leaving, there was a 7 year old walking out of the theater with his dad. Poor kid. I won't get into a big rant about it, but I definatly think that this movie is far from kid friendly.

--------------------

"And that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped” -Sir Bedevere the Wise

Quote (Fadien @ 2nd August 2008 02:10)

BTW, as we were leaving, there was a 7 year old walking out of the theater with his dad. Poor kid. I won't get into a big rant about it, but I definatly think that this movie is far from kid friendly.

I agree. They tried really hard to get that PG-13 rating. There was a little kid (about 7 years old as well) sitting near the front on opening night, and all I could think about is how unhappy he's going to be by the end of the movie. He sure was excited though, yelling and shouting and whatnot before the lights dimmed.

--------------------

I find your lack of faith disturbing...

And that's one of the downsides of a PG-13 rating. Even a kid younger than that would have trouble sitting through the movie; at best he might get bored, at worst he might get nightmares. (That's not even getting into the stupid, selfish parents who bring their toddlers to R-rated movies, but that's for another topic.)

I saw a similar situation when I went to see TDK. The boys were around 9, i would say. About three rows up in front of us, if memory serves.

They seemed to be enjoying the movie until

Possible spoilers: highlight to view

the part where the Joker video is played where he torments and then murders (off camera but audible) the Batman impersonator.

After that, one of them left with his mom and did not come back. The other stayed with his dad through the rest of the movie. I made it a point to check the kid out at the end of the movie, to see what his reaction was. I know when I was a kid, coming out of a movie I was all hyped up and talking about how awesome it was, ect. This kid, though..... he looked like he just came out of a funeral. Dull eyes, gloomy looking face.... it was sad. I can completely understand if, a year or two from now when the next Batman movie comes out, he tells his parents "no thanks' when they ask him if he wants to go see it.

*edited for spelling

This post has been edited by Hamedo on 2nd August 2008 18:16

--------------------

Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

~Pacifist Badge, 1978

The Dark Knight actually had a "General" rating here in Canada, or at least in my part of it and during my viewing, there were quite a few children that could've been anywhere between 6 to 10 years old. Of course there were a few older, but I'm going with the youngest group for my example. They sat behind me and laughed hysterically at some of the Joker's schemes. I don't think they fully understood some of the more psychological aspects of what was going on, or the philosophies that defined the Joker and the Batman, but they seemed to love the movie and were in fairly good spirits by the end of it.

I guess it's simply what you're used to? I know at that age, I was perfectly fine watching much more graphic, dark-themed movies.

--------------------

Okay, but there was a goat!

There's a lot of truth in your last few sentences, DF. It all depends on what you are used to. Personally, I don't want my little ones desensitized quite that early in life. TDK was an absolutely awesome flick, but I doubt I'll let any of my kids see it for many years to come.


From partiallyclips.com, and the creator of Erfworld.



This post has been edited by Hamedo on 4th August 2008 12:58

--------------------

Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

~Pacifist Badge, 1978

It's currently 12:56 AM as I'm starting to write this. I just got home from watching this movie, and I have to say I'm ashamed I let myself wait this long before going. I'll try not to rave too much; I can't say anything specifically about this movie that hasn't been said before. I will say, however, that in my opinion, this movie may well open the door for many more dark movies to truly question our morality and psyche.

On a side note, this movie has a 14A rating where I live (Canadian equivalent of PG-13), which I agree with as the minimum. I don't think anywhere should have given it a G rating, unless they were making a similar (but inverse) mistake to the one made by EB prior to the release of the Wall-E video game (EB Games' promotional material claimed the game had an M rating, when in fact it has an E rating).

This post has been edited by Suunok on 5th August 2008 08:02

Wow, this movie took Batman and made it so much more than Batman. I'd go as far as saying that Batman isn't even the most important thing in it! I was just mentally gone the next two hours after watching it..

Now for watching Batman Begins, i have the feeling i will be dissapointed.

--------------------

All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Broccoli to die.

Quote (Ganolink @ 7th August 2008 09:56)

Now for watching Batman Begins, i have the feeling i will be dissapointed.

You won't be. It is a very good intro-movie to the new series.

I will say that it starts out rather slowly, but this is required in order to see the Batman's origin and how he came to be.

--------------------

Join the Army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill them.

~Pacifist Badge, 1978

I've seen the movie a couple times now, and had been waiting for it to come out since December. It's one of those movies I tried not to get too excited about, but would keep hearing more and more about it, and so I would read up on it and get super excited for a while, and then feel that it wouldn't live up to the hype.

But, ever since I watched what Nolan did with The Prestige (one of my favorite movies of all time before this one), I knew this movie would not disappoint. And it certainly didn't, not on any level. It's truly the movie that has put comic book movies at a threshold, a standard to look up to.

With all of the Nicholson and Ledger debate going on, I have to admit, both of them pulled off their interpretations of the character very well. I have a certain gripe about Nicholson's Joker though, because I still firmly believe that Jack was just being Jack with makeup on and a purple suit (did not change his voice at all), but that also speaks to the living legend that is Jack Nicholson.

Heath Ledger, however, completely disappeared into his character. I honestly couldn't find, at any moment, that I was looking at the movie and thinking to myself "This is Heath Ledger as the Joker." This IS The Joker, in all his raw glory. This is talent at its best.

Aaron Eckhart was better than I expected, and was truly every bit as good as Bale, Caine, Freeman, and Oldman, if not better than all of them. It's hard to fit in the whole "tragic fall" story arc in one movie, with him not being the main villain, but it was pulled off pretty well. And Nolan didn't disappoint with leaving the end a bit ambiguous.

Best film of the year. Top 5 of all time.

This post has been edited by TheEvilEye on 7th August 2008 18:33