Aartemys Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Well, post your thoughts. Maybe we can help you cope with your feelings... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the division of joy Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 I know it goes against the comics, but why make one of the best bad guys in cinema, only to have him thwarted by a less than convincing good guy, with a shitty "moral" ending. It doesn't really add up to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alive she cried Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 some people Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the division of joy Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 what, some people who don't believe the hype? i thought the ending was a gigantic anticlimax.what, some people who don't believe the hype? i thought the ending was a gigantic anticlimax. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Bob Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Nah, the ending rocked. But then, I might just be blinded by the lack of microwave of emitter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Kaniggit Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 what, some people who don't believe the hype? i thought the ending was a gigantic anticlimax.what, some people who don't believe the hype? i thought the ending was a gigantic anticlimax. The ending I thought was awesome! Just like what made that movie so good, it was unexpected. The movie stayed away from most of the traps of superhero movies. It sounds like the biggest problem you had was with the moral strength Batman exhibits. If you are not familiar with incarnations of the character currently in comics and graphic novels, Batman's morality is always being put to the test. Batman has no superpowers, what he has is an inner strength that sets him apart from his superhero counterparts. So, if you find that flimsy or unbelievable that Batman can be that rigid in his beliefs, then yeah you probably would'nt like it. But, I must tell you, I have seen it with Batfanatics and with novices alike, no one I know has even mentioned not liking that aspect of the movie. Sorry man, you are out on that limb all by yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jables Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 what, some people who don't believe the hype? i thought the ending was a gigantic anticlimax.what, some people who don't believe the hype? i thought the ending was a gigantic anticlimax. No he's got a point in this: they should have done some editing post-heath to swap death/living scenarios. As it stands(and makes no sense), Dent, the standout for me is dead(or not) and Joker, a mighty-fucking-fine portayal from a now dead actor, is open-ended despite the fact if they bring him back they're gonna have to explain it with some terrible cosmetic surgury storyline or worse, could prove to be the catylist in this CGI actor business that gets brought up now and again. The last 5 minutes was heroicly awesome in my book, but some better work could have been put to squaring the villians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the division of joy Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 (edited) You're telling me the bit with the two boats was a good way to close off the film? Christ.... Did no one else think that them not blowing up was a bit fuckin predictable Edited August 8, 2008 by the division of joy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MetalHeart Posted August 9, 2008 Author Share Posted August 9, 2008 That was near the end of the movie, but didn't happen at the end... did it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Bob Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 You're telling me the bit with the two boats was a good way to close off the film? Christ.... Did no one else think that them not blowing up was a bit fuckin predictable Yeah it was, but it couldn't have gone any other way really without it becoming a completely different movie ( not to mention destroying Batman's faith in humanity and kinda taking away his motivation to keep going for a sequel - a cool idea to explore, but in a graphic novel, not in the second film of a series ). I think it was handled as well as it could be. No he's got a point in this: they should have done some editing post-heath to swap death/living scenarios. As it stands(and makes no sense), Dent, the standout for me is dead(or not) and Joker, a mighty-fucking-fine portayal from a now dead actor, is open-ended despite the fact if they bring him back they're gonna have to explain it with some terrible cosmetic surgury storyline or worse, could prove to be the catylist in this CGI actor business that gets brought up now and again. The last 5 minutes was heroicly awesome in my book, but some better work could have been put to squaring the villians. In retrospect, I actually like Harvey's fate, but the Joker's end could have been handled simply by adding a shot of the SWAT team firing their guns when they find him hanging from the top of the building - Gotham cops have notoriously loose morals and the Joker killed a lot of cops . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alive she cried Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 for baytor and anyone else that did'nt like bale's batman voice http://view.break.com/554666 - Watch more free videos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 (edited) Spot-on. P.S. it turns out Bale's Batman voice isn't so bad they electronically altered it to be "darker" Edited August 15, 2008 by Iambaytor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aartemys Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 No love for DK? He posted this same exact vid on 8/7... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 Ah, that's where I'd seen that before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alive she cried Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 woops, did'nt mean to steal dk's thunder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soldier of fortune Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 you fiend you! i do agree though i do think that they could have handled the ending better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 Like I said, all it came down to was Christopher Nolan didn't want to leave any loose ends in case he didn't come back. His contract was only for 2 movies though he apparently gets first choice for doing a 3rd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Bob Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 What are you kidding? The whole ending is loose ends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 (edited) Well yes, there's enough to make a sequel if needed, but if this is Nolan's last film then he's tied off all his plot points here. He's taken care of his villains and though he did leave it on a somewhat cliffhanger note it's nothing that a new director/cast couldn't pick up off of if the need was there. It's an ignorable thing if you're into it but I think that limited the film most for most people. It gave a definite reason not to like it. Edited August 16, 2008 by Iambaytor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Bob Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 I thought it was a much more open-ended ending than Begins, what with Batman becoming officially wanted for murder and the Joker's final fate literally left hanging. Only Harvey's subplot was wrapped up with any sense of closure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiffytee Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 so, is this an accurate potrayl of joker? cause he seemed pretty smart. i thought the comic books made him a blabbering idiot who spewed out jokes and killed for fun. in this movie he planned out the bank robbery, mayor assination (almost killing wayne in the process), dent attack/capture, who to save dilemna, boat dilemna, dent master plan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 This entirely depends on which Joker you're referring to, in the original Batman the Joker was just some thrill-killing mass-murdering psychopath, then he was a devious bankrobber (because killing isn't family friendly, but a grown man keeping an adolescent boy in a cave is a-okay), then he was a murdering bankrobber, then suddenly he's shooting Barbara Gordon in the spine and showing naked pictures of her to her Dad and shit. So he was faithful... kinda, so long as you look at the original Conrad Weisz inspired Joker not the Cesar Chavez or Jack Nicholson types. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Hightower Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 I think the essence of the Joker is really shown in the Dark Knight. He's a 'thrill-killing, mass-murdering psychopath' that can only do what he does best opposite the Batman. As said in the film: the Batman needs the Joker, but I think the Joker needs him much more. They're essentially the same character, except the Joker has excepted his psycho-ness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbie Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 (edited) Tim, when was the last time you read a Batman comic? The Joker hasn't been portrayed as stupid in a long, long time. You may be thinking of the cartoon version which had to be de-psychofied for the kid audience. For me, this movie version of the Joker was better than the comics version. I've never actually liked the comics Joker that much. But this Joker was a spectacular villian. When he burnt that pile of cash, that made the whole movie for me right there and redefined the character. Everything else was gravy. The comics are still kinda stuck on the Joker being motivated by money etc, but they've been drifting away from that for a while now. They're essentially the same character, except the Joker has excepted his psycho-ness. NO. I reject this. It's something that gets said a lot, but makes no sense to me. (that "The Joker is Batman's dark reflection") The only similarity is that they operate outside the law. You could set them up as polar opposites maybe on an 'order vs chaos' line. There is nothing, however, that makes the Joker stand out more than any other villian as Batman's dark reflection. Catwoman or Ra's al Gul could both make the claim with equal invalidity. The villian Hush is probably the best candidate for an opposite to Batman, but I don't like that character. Seems too contrived. ---------------- On a separate issure, I don't think the concept of his own psycho-ness ever even occurs to the joker. He seems like the kinda person who thinks he's actuing on secret truth rather than a person who thinks he's insane. Edited January 1, 2009 by Jumbie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 (edited) NO. I reject this. It's something that gets said a lot, but makes no sense to me. (that "The Joker is Batman's dark reflection") The only similarity is that they operate outside the law. You could set them up as polar opposites maybe on an 'order vs chaos' line. There is nothing, however, that makes the Joker stand out more than any other villian as Batman's dark reflection. Catwoman or Ra's al Gul could both make the claim with equal invalidity. The villian Hush is probably the best candidate for an opposite to Batman, but I don't like that character. Seems too contrived. I always thought that Manbat was Batman's opposite-doppelganger, but only because his name is the two root words of Batman only backwards. At least he will have been the heir to that throne...until I publish by Batman fan fiction that debuts his greatest villain, "Namtab: Batman's true evil twin!" Edited January 1, 2009 by Reverend Jax Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.