tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post7031356647187133814..comments2024-03-28T18:01:28.997-04:00Comments on What's Alan Watching?: At the movies: The Dark KnightAlan Sepinwallhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03388147774725646742noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-89462727085317490822008-07-30T11:38:00.000-04:002008-07-30T11:38:00.000-04:00Agree with Undercover Black Man and the poster who...Agree with Undercover Black Man and the poster who brought up the issue of "what's at stike." Really like this movie in spite of this, though.<BR/><BR/>Still, the thing is unbelievably dense--two and a half hours, and every line of dialogue seems to be purely plot-driving (e.g. 10 second explanation of the RICO laws) or setting up the obvious themes. I can't imagine how people of a certain age even begin to follow all this, let alone the action sequences.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-7317955726928418292008-07-25T00:57:00.000-04:002008-07-25T00:57:00.000-04:00- until I read reviews (and this thread), I had no...<I> - until I read reviews (and this thread), I had no idea that the Scarecrow was even in this movie</I><BR/><BR/>He was in the beginning with his Scarecrow mask. Cillian Murphy's name is also in the credits. Seeing it again tonight and I'm still cracking up that one year later, the Scarecrow's out of Arkham and causing trouble--just like in the comics!<BR/><BR/><I>- In the scene where Batman has to save either Rachel or Harvey, I was sure he went after Rachel, but then was confused when he saved Dent. Again, it wasn't until I read this thread that I learned (at least according to one poster) that the Joker had switched the addresses.</I><BR/><BR/>It was very obvious in the movie and the characters even talk about it. I don't think you can blame the film for confusing you on that one :-)<BR/><BR/><I>- I still have no idea how the whole "Batman gets the Chinese CEO back into the plane" thing worked. It was too quick and too dark for me.</I><BR/><BR/>Batman had the signal balloon on and the plane with the "skyhook" latched onto it and pulled Lau & him up into the plane.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-66203409991271231752008-07-25T00:49:00.000-04:002008-07-25T00:49:00.000-04:00Jason Todd's alive now, too.Are you s*%@ing me? Of...<I>Jason Todd's alive now, too.</I><BR/><BR/>Are you s*%@ing me? Of all the... Well, ok, according to Wikipedia, Gwen Stacy is still dead, so, yeah. Grumble grumble, stupid kids, with their bringing people back from the dead, grumble grumble...pgillanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627255978843800751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-48527328369640879202008-07-24T23:04:00.000-04:002008-07-24T23:04:00.000-04:00@pgillan, Jason Todd's alive now, too.@pgillan, Jason Todd's alive now, too.R.A. Porterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14851961356321735388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-29311792655519221922008-07-24T23:01:00.000-04:002008-07-24T23:01:00.000-04:00Two face will be the main bad guy in the 3rd movie...<I>Two face will be the main bad guy in the 3rd movie. That is what they set up. It's a comic book movie. Who stays "dead"?</I><BR/><BR/>Is there a source for this? While, sure, it's a comic book movie, I thought it had a stronger scent of realism than that. They showed the body, and they confirmed the death. I can only hope, for the movie's sake, that they resist that urge.<BR/><BR/>And the answer to your question used to be "Bucky Barnes" and "Jason Todd", but I thought I heard somewhere that they resurrected Bucky.pgillanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627255978843800751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-41485038190136683652008-07-24T22:44:00.000-04:002008-07-24T22:44:00.000-04:00Two face will be the main bad guy in the 3rd movie...Two face will be the main bad guy in the 3rd movie. That is what they set up. It's a comic book movie. Who stays "dead"?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-74133700563501562002008-07-24T11:48:00.000-04:002008-07-24T11:48:00.000-04:00Michael P -- I disagree with you about the Chicago...Michael P -- I disagree with you about the Chicago scenes. After the first few minutes, where I sat there thinking "been there, been there, WORK there," I totally forgot it was Chicago (except for the scenes on Lower Wacker -- that's just too obvious, but it was the same with Batman Begins).<BR/><BR/>I loved the movie, but I agree with many of the criticisms. I thought it went on a bit too long, and I thought Dent needed more time with his transformation into evil. I'm not a comic book fan so I don't know the backstory, and it seemed that you only got a real appreciation if you could fill in the blanks (my boyfriend helpfully did that beforehand). I did however believe that he could be persuaded by the Joker, not because the Joker was so convincing, but because Dent needed so very little to push him over the already teetering edge.<BR/><BR/>I found the scenes with the hostages where Batman was using the sonar insert-technobabble-thingie to track the Joker particularly confusing and rather nausea-inducing. I had to shut my eyes at points to avoid motion sickness.<BR/><BR/>One scene I haven't seen mentioned here -- when the hanging Batman bumps into the Mayor's window, EVERYONE in the theater jumped about a foot out of their chairs.<BR/><BR/>All in all, it was certainly the best comic book/superhero movie I've seen. And Ledger was amazing.Robinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02516927613757605393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-87278146598964200772008-07-24T11:27:00.000-04:002008-07-24T11:27:00.000-04:00I fall in the middle camp - I enjoyed it, but didn...I fall in the middle camp - I enjoyed it, but didn't love it. And part of the reason I couldn't love it was because I found a lot of it to be very confusing. For example:<BR/><BR/>- until I read reviews (and this thread), I had no idea that the Scarecrow was even in this movie<BR/><BR/>- In the scene where Batman has to save either Rachel or Harvey, I was sure he went after Rachel, but then was confused when he saved Dent. Again, it wasn't until I read this thread that I learned (at least according to one poster) that the Joker had switched the addresses.<BR/><BR/>- I still have no idea how the whole "Batman gets the Chinese CEO back into the plane" thing worked. It was too quick and too dark for me.<BR/><BR/>- Same with the truck/Batmobile/van chase. Too quick, too dark, I couldn't figure out who was where doing what.<BR/><BR/>But I still enjoyed the story (although I agree, Dent's transformation could have been completed in a sequel), and loved the performances of Eckhart and Heath Ledger. I do wish Harvey and Rachel had had one more scene to establish their relationship - we went from Rachel not being sure if she wanted to marry him to her saying she didn't want to be on this earth without him and him avenging the death of his "family." I would have felt that more if I'd thought of them as a couple truly in love, but I didn't see it.Susanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02239086941985919886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-10157825730904438112008-07-24T02:14:00.000-04:002008-07-24T02:14:00.000-04:00I finally remembered the other, minor little thing...I finally remembered the other, minor little thing that bothered me about this movie. There were three or four scenes in which Batman was standing in a well-lit room full of people. The one that seemed the most jarring to me was the scene in the bank vault when he's talking to Gordon. Stop to consider how far he would have had to walk into the building to get there and how many people were milling around. Another one was the scene at the party when he confronts the Joker. It's hard to imagine how he maintains his "creature of the night" mystique when he presents that many great photo opportunities.pgillanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627255978843800751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-57491114929987345032008-07-24T01:57:00.000-04:002008-07-24T01:57:00.000-04:00Trying to get back into the discussion after being...Trying to get back into the discussion after being pulled away.<BR/><BR/>It did seem like a number of the people who objected to my concerns with the film did so with the quote I posted only, without the context of my entire review. I didn't want to post the link without any other content, because it felt more like spam, but the quote doesn't sum up the entirety of my feelings about the film positive and negative.<BR/><BR/>Andrew - Yes, one of the problems that I voiced was that unlike in the previous film, Gotham was just Chicago with the name changed. People in the audience here IN Chicago kept tittering about how obviously the landmarks kept appearing.<BR/><BR/>BGF - good point about Joker and the accountant, a conflicted mission there that I didn't pick up on right away.<BR/><BR/>Anonymous / Brian - I didn't have a problem with Dent wanting revenge upon Gordon (the comic fan in me rankled a bit at Gordon being a THIRD target after a nicely paired set of cops, but that aspect wasn't played up as highly in the film, which is fine). In fact, I agree that Dent needed to hold Gordon responsible, because otherwise Gordon gets off relatively scott free in a movie that's about how everyone is supposed to be culpable in some way.Michael Petersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13973966399885176589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-77036003305409475002008-07-24T01:07:00.000-04:002008-07-24T01:07:00.000-04:00The ferry scene was cheesy at the end. I mean it w...The ferry scene was cheesy at the end. I mean it was an interesting dilemma and all, but the big black guy (ooh scary!) doing the "right" thing was cheesy.SJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01245472084190224186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-85384227521275541362008-07-24T00:46:00.000-04:002008-07-24T00:46:00.000-04:00I disagree. The scene on the two ferries got to me...I disagree. The scene on the two ferries got to me, it won me over, even though I kinda knew what was coming. When Lister says "And I'll do what you shoulda done ten minutes ago..." I cheered to myself because I knew it would fuck with the joker, even though I wanted badly to see what would happen when he was proven right...I thoroughly enjoyed that scene.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-91042544762229280642008-07-24T00:14:00.000-04:002008-07-24T00:14:00.000-04:00@bgf, thanks for the response. As to your first e...@bgf, thanks for the response. As to your first example, I think the scene with the Scarecrow and the Batfakes was deliberately confusing to give the audience the sense of what life in Gotham is now like. For your other examples, yes, I guess it is subjective to a person's tolerance because I didn't have a problem knowing who was where, etc. When I see it again, I'll try to pay more attention (can't guarantee that I won't be all caught up in the excitement again, heh).<BR/><BR/>@r.a. porter--I think it depends on which stories Nolan draws from as to whether a character can have redemption or not. At this point, I think Harvey should stay dead, though.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-74544654169071067032008-07-23T23:32:00.000-04:002008-07-23T23:32:00.000-04:00Put me with those who say "The Dark Knight" is way...Put me with those who say "The Dark Knight" is <EM>way</EM> overrated.<BR/><BR/>Heath Ledger's Joker was fantastic in every way. But the movie started losing me with that big chase scene with the trucks. For a big action set piece, that just wasn't very thrilling to me.<BR/><BR/>And the ferry bit <EM> really</EM> didn't work, because the jeopardy is so far removed from the characters we actually care about. Not far removed in distance but far removed in <EM>impact</EM>. It was abstract.<BR/><BR/>Remove Ledger from this movie, and what would you have? Sort of a mess, I think.Undercover Black Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08704721024820668555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-81508894730470316682008-07-23T23:26:00.000-04:002008-07-23T23:26:00.000-04:00Which sequences do you mean? I've seen this compla...<I>Which sequences do you mean? I've seen this complaint elsewhere, but no specifics. I didn't have a problem following any of the action sequences, so am very curious about this particular complaint.</I><BR/><BR/>I think it would be hard to convince one of this. The beginning sequence with the dogs, alternate batmen and Cillian Murphy was particularly confusing. The sequence with the SWAT teams was also hard to track where he and the swat teams were. It is definitely subjective as to your tolerance for knowing where people and things are in relation to one another, but most fight sequences are much more clearly edited to give you that sense. The marquee sequence with the vehicles was thrilling but also not as clearly edited to give a sense of where the objects were in relation to one another, but easier to track just because roads, semis, and armored trucks are easier to keep track of. I doubt you will find this response satisfactory, though.<BR/><BR/>--bgfAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-46370954176814374022008-07-23T20:56:00.000-04:002008-07-23T20:56:00.000-04:00It is probably the best super-hero movie ever. But...It is probably the best super-hero movie ever. But even after dozens of such movies, it isn't saying much.<BR/><BR/>It is a good 30 minutes too long (I agree that Dent's transformation should have happened in the sequel), and oddly constructed. Some characters appear and disappear randomly, and some death scenes don't have nearly the emotional impact they should have, since the plot seems to forget about them quickly.<BR/><BR/>Still a very good summer flick, but it doesn't bring the super-hero genre anywhere close to producing a real film masterpiece.Mrglasshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11904825729610838862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-16216431609858240212008-07-23T20:39:00.000-04:002008-07-23T20:39:00.000-04:00@dez - then again, if Miller's TDK is considered i...@dez - then again, if Miller's TDK is considered in canon, Harvey really doesn't get a redemption arc. That's one of the more heartbreaking comics stories I've ever read.R.A. Porterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14851961356321735388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-55607289356866687082008-07-23T18:57:00.000-04:002008-07-23T18:57:00.000-04:00But it has flaws. One is that it is so hard to tel...<I>But it has flaws. One is that it is so hard to tell what is going on in a lot of the action sequences. </I><BR/><BR/>Which sequences do you mean? I've seen this complaint elsewhere, but no specifics. I didn't have a problem following any of the action sequences, so am very curious about this particular complaint.<BR/><BR/>@Michael P. - To clarify, I was talking about me specifically and my habit of filling in gaps (whether there or not). My friends who have seen the movie don't have the same knowledge of Two Face as I do, yet had no problems with Dent's change or his scene with the Joker. The gap thing is just the way my brain works.<BR/><BR/><I>All of that said, I'm familiar enough with the Batman history to know that Two Face was a long standing villian, but not familiar enough to know all that much about what happened to him through the years</I><BR/><BR/>I think they have character histories on DC's website, plus there are related and fansites with the info (just make sure you're reading about comics history vs. animated show history, etc., since there's more than one version of the character out there). Dent seems to have gone in and out of sanity, depending on the needs of the story being told at the time. I also think Nolan did the right thing with the character (though having him in the next film and getting a redemption arc would have been okay with me, too).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-61776627458638938742008-07-23T17:27:00.000-04:002008-07-23T17:27:00.000-04:00Michael - I agree with your thought process and I ...Michael - I agree with your thought process and I think The Joker's speech accomplished that. He said to Harvey, "It's a schemer who put you where you are. You were a schemer. You had plans. Look where it got you.... Introduce a little anarchy, you upset the established order, and everything becomes chaos. I am an agent of chaos. And you know the thing about chaos, Harvey? It's fair." So, you could argue that this is what made Harvey willing to go and hunt down the people that he believed did this to him. Remember - he knows who drove him and gave him up to Joker's people and he knows who drove Rachel. And those people to him represent the institution and the system that he pledged himself to work within. And that system betrayed him, killed the woman he loved and left him horribly damaged. So at that point, it seems reasonable to believe that Harvey would accept the reality that he cannot change the system from within; he needs to break the rules he was holding himself to in order to obtain justice for Rachel. <BR/><BR/>I think I have the sense that you accept that Harvey has sufficient motivation to kill the two cops who drove he and Rachel. I'll agree that it's harder to make the connection that he should have gone after Gordon. But you could argue that after all the assurances Gordon gave him that he had clean cops in his unit, for this to happen, for corrupt cops to be in the MCU, Gordon has to be held accountable. I also think Harvey feels that Gordon and Batman wrongly chose to send Batman to save him and the cops to save Rachel. He doesn't know that the Joker switched the addresses he gave Batman and Joker. Harvey feels they thought he was more valuable as the DA than Rachel was as an assistant DA, so they chose to send Batman to him. If it had been reversed, Rachel would have lived. This echoes what Joker said in his speech about (I'm paraphrasing from memory)"if gangbangers get killed, no one cares, but threaten to kill one little mayor and everyone freaks out." If Rachel dies, it's much less politically damaging than if Dent dies. So he hates Gordon and Batman for acting politically rather than fairly, even though we know he's wrong to think that way. (Quick aside: the parallels with The Wire and the power of institutions and intra-institution politics is pretty prevalent.)So now Harvey is all about fairness, and the only fairness in the world is the flip of his coin.<BR/><BR/>All of that said, I'm familiar enough with the Batman history to know that Two Face was a long standing villian, but not familiar enough to know all that much about what happened to him through the years. I think what Nolan chose to do was right because, I think that given how Harvey became Two Face, after even a little bit of time had passed, that Two Face would have regained his sanity and become Harvey again. Which makes the short time period that all of his actions happen seem more believable to me and his feasibility as a long-term villian less so.<BR/><BR/>Sorry for the long brain dump.<BR/><BR/>BrianAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-8276198918593279562008-07-23T17:18:00.000-04:002008-07-23T17:18:00.000-04:00(I keep trying to post this but the page just refr...(I keep trying to post this but the page just refreshes without posting. I apologize if it double-posts.) <BR/><BR/>I did think this was the most thrilling movie I've seen since Bourne, probably my favorite superhero movie ever, and I want to see it again right away. On the other hand, just to give some support to peterson, I agree with nearly all the negative reviews I've read. (Well, I don't agree with peterson's take, and Uhlich's review was a series of adjectives without substance). But Zacharek and Edelstein provide a nice corrective to the hosannas that TDK has received. It is an ambitious movie with fantastic performances, beautiful design, some very exciting sequences. It truly is an achievement that I could watch over and over. <BR/><BR/>But it has flaws. One is that it is so hard to tell what is going on in a lot of the action sequences. The other, in my view, is the thematic elements don't quite feel organic. I think of Nolan as a kind of a puzzlemaker on his movies. Once he figures out the plot puzzle he realizes he has to add some stakes, some deeper themes. So it just gets added as dialogue. I didn't enjoy Batman Begins because I realized in the middle that there were no stakes, I just didn't care, and everyone was acting like it was genocidally serious but I couldn't sign on to that cast of mind. This movie has a similar problem with stakes. What are they? What are we hoping to be the case by the end of the film? You can sort of see how this is a problem with the conception of the Joker-- I disagree with Peterson that he is not an agent of chaos-- he is. He has no backstory that could have been prevented. He's just a tornado that comes into town. So...what does it have to do with Gotham? Given that he is just Chaos, how does he relate to the general sinking of the Gotham spirit? How can we prevent any Joker? We can't, which is why the theme of Gotham needing to believe in itself fits uncomfortably side by side with him. <BR/><BR/>So I would agree with the reviewers that call the movie a bit incoherent. This is true of the directing and editing of the action sequences, the thoroughline of the plot (why did the Joker want to know Batman's identity AND kill the one person about to reveal it?), and the general stakes. But still, enormous fun to watch all the same.SMMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03228707282665237517noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-1927169147687711342008-07-23T17:16:00.000-04:002008-07-23T17:16:00.000-04:00Am I the only person who, during the chase sequenc...Am I the only person who, during the chase sequence, thought "this is definitely Lower Wacker Drive" (ala Elwood Blues)?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-80852519102424931302008-07-23T17:07:00.000-04:002008-07-23T17:07:00.000-04:00Harvey flipped the coin on Joker, same as he did f...Harvey flipped the coin on Joker, same as he did for anyone else after that. The Joker just gave Harvey the final push he was looking for into complete madness. Dent was already threatening Gordan before his conversation with the Joker.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-73108625613784761722008-07-23T16:50:00.000-04:002008-07-23T16:50:00.000-04:00Dez - No harm done. Let's all be sociable.As to yo...Dez - No harm done. Let's all be sociable.<BR/><BR/>As to your last comment, that's part of my complaint - we can't rely on our understanding of the source material to fill in gaps, especially when we're diverting from it - and diverting from it is fine, except when we're forced to rely upon it to accept what's going on.Michael Petersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13973966399885176589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-68187562796279480562008-07-23T16:00:00.000-04:002008-07-23T16:00:00.000-04:00...Well, I sincerely do apologize if I honestly ca...<I>...Well, I sincerely do apologize if I honestly came off that way</I><BR/><BR/>And I apologize for being so sarcastic. Probably spillover from reading TWOP for so long (where the "I don't get the [opinion different from mine}" comments usually get smacked down hard) :-)<BR/><BR/>And I bought that scene you mentioned for the same reasons as Brian. We already know Harvey's flawed (remember how long it took Batman to dissuade him from killing the Joker's minion), so I had no problem believing he'd fall for the Joker's ideas. And probably because I know the history of the character and was probably filling in gaps based on that knowledge (sort of can't help that with comic book movies, sometimes).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17517257.post-51439013710320471312008-07-23T15:02:00.000-04:002008-07-23T15:02:00.000-04:00Brian - No, I agree, his lie is obvious - for me, ...Brian - No, I agree, his lie is obvious - for me, the problem is that Harvey knows too much from where the movie's taken him for him to believe what Joker tells him at that point. He's addled, grief-stricken, broken - but he's not stupid, a fact made tacit when he hunts down the pair of crooked (or at least compromised) cops. Not only do I not buy Dent believing Joker at that moment, I think that's the moment when he'd believe Joker the least.<BR/><BR/>What would have made more sense, to me, would be for Joker to have shown, instead, just how compromised Harvey already was, and shown how Harvey himself was complicit in what had occurred - establishing that however much Dent was like Batman before, he was much more like the Joker after the accident. It would have still fit the themes Nolan was working towards but would have gone some way towards actually supporting his arguments.Michael Petersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13973966399885176589noreply@blogger.com