I was wondering about that. It'll be on my Christmas list.

I still haven't seen it, I will get it on DVD, although, it does sound pretty good

FINALLY saw DK tonight!

As I mentioned on Facebook: Very good movie! The extras disc left a lot to be desired, though (waste of time, for the most part). Ledger was terrific, but Bale was a bit disappointing -- especially his Batman voice. WTF was with that? Overall, tho... very good!

Well duh, you really think they wouldn't leave the good shit out of the SE DVD down the line to strain our credit even more?

It's a racket...and dammit, I'll pay into it myself. We all are fucked by it.

Geoff, what did you think of the ending?

Geoff

I was curious as to your opinion. I never was a Batman fan (still am not) BUT it was the previews of the movie with Ledger that drew me to the theater. He was fantastic and very creepy. Plus I liked the cartoonish looking shots of the ciy and the chase scenes I wondered about Bale's voice too. I have know idea why he spoke like that. It does seem rather strange that nobody picked up on it's "weirdness" while shooting the film.

TIS

I just put it at the top of my Netflix queue. However, I keep forgetting to return the last movie, so I'm not sure how that's going to work if I don't get to the FRIGGING MAILBOX!!

My daughter saw Dark Knight in the theater and absolutely LOVED it.

Gotta run, but I just heard Ledger is nominated for Golden Globe.




TIS

Which was the extent of TDK at the Globes, which surprised quite a few people.

I still haven't read or heard a convincing positive reaction to the film yet. It's politically abhorrent, intellectually vacuous, and determined to invest "seriousness" into would-be fun. It doesn't work at all for me. None of it rings true, literally or allegorically. Take it on the terms it aspires to be taken, and everything pretty much falls flat.

The Dark Knight is overrated and shit. If heath hadn't died it would have been just another movie.

"Oh Heath died, his last role, what a great film the best ever"

Grow a spine you trouts.

Who asked you? Go back to your elitist website full of immature teens

Whispers right, the Dark Knight is overated.

I don't know what publications you read, but it got rave reviews from just about everyone. Ledger's performance imho ranks close to Brando's iconic performance in The Godfather.

So your comparing Batman to Don Corleone?!

Whats the world coming to?

I think most of us here prefer Godfather 3 to Batman!

Yeah, the film dips significantly when he's not onscreen, the same way The Godfather sort of wanes when Brando's absent. But Brando's is a great performance in a fine ensemble; Ledger's the star attraction in a weak pool. And I see no reason why his performance must be put on the same platform as Brando ahead of every other great acting display out there, much less a year after Daniel Day-Lewis's performance in There Will Be Blood - that pretty much obliterates everything around him.

There's more to The Dark Knight than Ledger's performance though. It aspires to social relevance, to political realism, to psychological plausibility; none of which can possibly be achieved in the fictional city of Gotham. In order to achieve any of those three things, you'd have to change the fundamental elements - ie. an urban environment in which the high levels of crime are in flux with all other social and economic factors leading to it; also, a hero who doesn't dress as a bat as a result of violently being orphaned as a boy.

I've read my fair share of critical writing on it; it didn't make Sight & Sound's top ten, but a few contributing critics have it in their personal top five (January issue). Again, their reasons aren't convincing enough for me; they find great enjoyment in the film but either ignore or fail to notice its (reactionary) political ideologies or self-defeating 'artistic' intentions (which arise from commercial needs, not artistic ones). Ebert loves it, of course - never a good sign.

But all the praise amounts to vague buzz-phrases. The film could have been amazingly fun, but it shoots itself in the foot with all the "omg anarchy is evil" bullshit. It's empty, artistic dishonesty.

There's a fuller discussion here, from which much of my opinions on the film stem.

I think TDK is a pretty horrible movie. The movie played out exactly how I thought it would leaving me yawning and not really paying attention to be honest. As for Ledger's performance? It was pretty good but the man was getting paid millions for the role so hopefully he would be alright.

I bought the DVD for my son for Christmas. He saw it three times in the theatre, and it's his favorite movie. He's not usually impressed by films, so I'm looking forward to watching it with him. I haven't seen it.

I'll probably give it to him before Christmas.

I thought it was a very good movie. Ledger makes for the world's coolest villain as The Joker.

I think looking for social and political commentary in this movie is pretty pointless but it entertains like many movies can't.

Didn't you also call MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 3 "creative"?

Since when is Christian Bale, Gary Oldman, and Michael fucking Caine a weak pool?

Don't take IMDB so seriously.

Also, Heath was terrific, regardless of him dead or not. Considering how weak the Supporting Actor field is this year, he probably could have contended for an Oscar if he hadn't croaked.

Unless you can provide 5 better, more worthy nominees.

While I think there are many times that Oscar winners who have passed on get a sympathy vote and win the statue, I don't see Ledger's performance that way.

Like I said, I was never (ever) a Batman fan, nor can I say I was ever a Ledger fan (not that I disliked him mind you). As a matter of fact beside Batman, the only movie I saw with him was his first with Mel Gibson (can't think of the name of it).

It was the quick shots of him in the previews of the film that drew me to actually go to the theater and pay money to see a Batman movie. He made the film IMHO. I only can say I was not disappointed. I looked forward to every scene he was in.

Of course I am not the movie buff that many of you are nor do I see movies at the theater on a regular basis, BUT as far as I'm concerened Ledger earned AT LEAST a nomination for what I think was an outstanding performance, dead or alive.

TIS

You're thinking of THE PATRIOT.

Also, may I just ask TIS why you don't like Batman so much? From the posts I've read you've seem to emphasize your point that your not nor ever have been a fan of Batman like he's the plague or something. Just curious.

Hi I12

I don't mean to imply that I detest Batman, but rather that I never was into the early tv show nor could I get into any of the movies. I think I saw the very first one (with Michael Keaton), but that was because others wanted to see it. My impulse is to say maybe the premise of Batman, BUT

On the other hand, I love Superman, so I don't think I'm prudish or unimaginative. Can't really put my finger on it, but would venture to say that DK will probably be the last Batman movie I see. Go figure!!


TIS

You gotta admit Jack Nicholson was the draw for that one -- he was great!

Yes! The original was probably the best until BATMAN BEGINS and THE DARK KNIGHT came out.

Ok, now it makes more sense. I've always preferred Batman to Superman. I don't know, for me, Superman just seemed like he could never be defeated and where was the fun in that? Batman, is a human being with no superpowers. He uses gadgets, brute strength, and his intelligence to get by.

Okay. A pool of ordinary performances. They all do what is required of them, but that's not much: the script is awful.

It's impossible to transcend its comic book origins. And that's in no way a dent to comic books; but it is an honest claim as to comic books' silliness. If anyone wishes to argue how Batman comics aren't silly, good luck...

I remember several of that film's scenes as being vaguely inventive, yes. And edited to perfection; as an action film, I enjoyed it very much.

But, in short, your original question isn't relevant, to be honest. M:I 3 never aspired to be taken seriously.

No.

Looking for social and political commentary in this movie should be pointless (it's a Batman film, after all), but I'm just approaching the film in the same way the director and producers did. If you want to understand a film as best you can before deciding on its worth, authorial intent can't go ignored.

And everyone who likes the film either do so despite its politics, or because of them.

Vague promotional phrases such as "The Joker is pure evil"; that kind of stuff. You really can't make a psychologically, politically or socially realistic film with that sort of jargon behind it.

And, as I said, you can't ever approach a Batman film seriously; and that goes for the makers as well as the viewers.

The makers have (fatally) approached it in all seriousness. Nolan directed The Prestige; he's far too talented to be wasting time on this franchise (in the way in which he is). Don't be so intellectually or artistically dishonest.

(I'd be interested in how anyone refutes this.)