THE DARK KNIGHT (2008) Joker Revealed!

[mcruz1014]

Originally Posted by kujoe

The Riddler sounds good actually. He could really mess up Gotham, and I think it would be interesting to see Batman's detective side.

Yeah, that would be an interesting aspect of Batman's character to see, and I think we got a nice glimpse of that in The Dark Knight. After all, they don't call him the World's Greatest Detective for nothing.

[cheyannew]

Originally Posted by kujoe

That one is good too. Mine are...

Spoiler for my favorite Joker moment:

...his disappearing pencil magic trick, and when he was asking for his phone call.

We rented the theatre for work, so everyone could see it (SO glad I did NOT bring my kids lol)

The ENTIRE theatre actually busted out laughing with the above trick LOL


I know, we're deviants

[WanderingKnight]

Went to the Imax to watch this on Friday night. Simply put, it's the best movie I've seen in a long, long time. It's fast-paced since the very first second, and it doesn't stop through the whole film... The tension got me nervous and bursting with excitement through the whole 150 minutes. And Ledger's performance is simply magnificent--if he gets an Oscar for this, it won't be because he's dead. I expected a popcorn film, and was surprised with a masterpiece.

And I don't even like super hero movies. In fact, I hate super heroes for the most part. Luckily enough, my friends managed to convince me to go watch it.

[james0246]

Just in, Batman: The Dark Knight has grossed an estimated 155 million dollars for its 3 day opening weekend, becoming the current #1 largest opening weekend ever (surpassing Spiderman III's 5 day opening of 151 million). Averging around 36 thousnad per theatre (of over 4300 theatres), the film also grossed around 40 million in the foreign market to add up to a grand total of 195 million worldwide gross.

[Evil Rick]

Originally Posted by ApostleOfGod

Now I know how to magically make a pencil disappear.

lol

Indeed, indeed

[mcruz1014]

Originally Posted by james3wk

Just in, Batman: The Dark Knight has grossed an estimated 155 million dollars for its 3 day opening weekend, becoming the current #1 largest opening weekend ever (surpassing Spiderman III's 5 day opening of 151 million). Averging around 36 thousnad per theatre (of over 4300 theatres), the film also grossed around 40 million in the foreign market to add up to a grand total of 195 million worldwide gross.

Great news!!! However average ticket prices were about 20 cents lower a year ago, and mediabynumbers.com calculated that Spider Man 3 sold more tickets than TDK at the current recorded figures, although I'm sure there are people still boosting ticket sales (I've seen the movie twice already, and plan to see it a third time in IMAX).

[Reckoner]

Interestingly enough for anyone who has ever visited the webpage, The Dark Knight has overtook the Godfather as the number 1 rated movie on IMDB.

http://www.imdb.com/chart/top

This of course is going to start a ratings war over there, I don't think all the Godfather fans are going to let this down at all.

[yezhanquan]

For those who has seen both, how does the Joker here stack up against Johan Liebert from Monster?

[Reckoner]

Originally Posted by yezhanquan

For those who has seen both, how does the Joker here stack up against Johan Liebert from Monster?

Well for one, Johan had a reason but the Joker didn't have a reason for what he was doing. The Joker just seemed to do things for fun in a psychotic way. The Joker was true evil while Johan for whatever reason appeared as a pure person who happened to commit evil acts.

[Tommy]

I love going to see a movie that actually meets all the hype surrounding it. In the last movie Bale was the star, but in this movie it felt like he took a back seat to Ledger and Aaron Eckhart.

And in all honesty I don't think this Batman movie can be topped, the Joker was the best villain and Ledger's performance was perfect. All I hope for is that the next movie doesn't crash and burn, which I don't think it will.

[james0246]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Well for one, Johan had a reason but the Joker didn't have a reason for what he was doing. The Joker just seemed to do things for fun in a psychotic way. The Joker was true evil while Johan for whatever reason appeared as a pure person who happened to commit evil acts.

I would have to disagree. True "evil" requires a conscious decision to perform an "evil" act (this decision is created after a person weights their options, etc). The Joker is pure chaos rather than pure evil (think of him as almost an agent of entropy set out to destroy society for no other reason that the fact that society exsists).

Having said that, Johan had more of a reason (in the fact that he has a more legitimate and verifiable background that is clearly shown to effect his actions) that the Joker (whose background may or may not be true), but at the same time they are very similiar in regards to their wanton and senseless destruction. While many of the older generation compared Johan to Hitler, Johan was never really like Hitler. Johan has no other purpose than too see the world burn, so he constantly killed people (either by is own hand, or by some scheme he had) whether they be ally or foe for no other reason than the fact that they exsisted, much the same as the Joker.

Nolan's storyline, though, is very similiar to Monster .

[yezhanquan]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Well for one, Johan had a reason but the Joker didn't have a reason for what he was doing. The Joker just seemed to do things for fun in a psychotic way. The Joker was true evil while Johan for whatever reason appeared as a pure person who happened to commit evil acts.

Hmmm... sounds interesting.

[WanderingKnight]

I would have to disagree. True "evil" requires a conscious decision to perform an "evil" act (this decision is created after a person weights their options, etc). The Joker is pure chaos rather than pure evil (think of him as almost an agent of entropy set out to destroy society for no other reason that the fact that society exsists).

For D&D players, think of this as the difference between Lawful Evil and pure Chaotic.

(Yeah, we actually discussed this on the way out of the cinema).

[james0246]

Originally Posted by WanderingKnight

For D&D players, think of this as the difference between Lawful Evil and pure Chaotic.

(Yeah, we actually discussed this on the way out of the cinema).

Wow, talk about deja vu. I had that exact same D&D conversation (concerning Lex Luthor and the Joker, and their placement in the realm of D&D morality) when my friend's and I went to see the Batman film...Tim Burton's Batman . That is how you know a character has become an icon, when 20+ years later you are still discussing their moral standings, etc.

[kujoe]

Originally Posted by WanderingKnight

For D&D players, think of this as the difference between Lawful Evil and pure Chaotic.

(Yeah, we actually discussed this on the way out of the cinema).

Originally Posted by james3wk

Wow, talk about deja vu. I had that exact same D&D conversation (concerning Lex Luthor and the Joker, and their placement in the realm of D&D morality) when my friend's and I went to see the Batman film...Tim Burton's Batman . That is how you know a character has become an icon, when 20 years later you are still discussing their moral standings, etc.

Man, I'm glad I wasn't the only one thinking in this way..!

So what would the Joker be? Chaotic Neutral? CN can be interpreted in many ways, being the most flexible of alignments—ranging from the insane all the way to the "free spirit" who makes his own rules. Somehow, pure Chaotic Evil just doesn't fit the Joker.

Well, the D&D alignment system is pretty limiting sometimes, but it's a fun thing to think about I guess... except I pretty much kept this to myself considering the person I watched it with wasn't geeky enough to be into these things.

[Rurik]

First off, I haven’t seen the movie yet, as the premiere around here is about 1 month from now (I’m actually thinking to traveling to US to see the movie =p

Originally Posted by james3wk

I just saw it...but now I am tired. So, here are some of my thoughts before I drift off to sleep.

Wow, I don’t want to see your review if you were not tired!!!!!!!!! And you are a really harsh critic, You should work with Roger Ebert.

Then again, it is possible that Nolan, in constructing the story, was attempting to turn the Joker and Batman into Miltonesque personas (the Joker as the Devil/Lucifer, and Batman as Adam), and, as anyone who has read the epic poem knows, the Devil is infinitely more interesting than humanity in Paradise Lost.

I think this was the intention, remember we are seen a rookie batman, and not the Bat Man you have seen in the animated series.

All in all, this is probably the best Comic Book movie ever made, easily surpassing Iron Man and Spider-Man II. But, it is only a good to very good film (easily 3 stars, and when I see it again (when I am less tired ) probably 3 1/2 stars).

More about Spider man 2 ahead…

Originally Posted by Vexx

Actually.... Burton was responsible for moving Batman far away FROM campy idiocy if you'll recall the 1960's Batman tv series. He put an edge to The Batman that mainstream audiences had never realized existed. yeah, it was still a bit campy (after all --- crazy people in costumes). Mostly it was incredibly bad directing and writing that sent the series into fiery doom in the last few movies. In my mind at least, Nolan, Bale, and Ledger accomplished the rest of what Burton's original vision set the franchise towards. These characters are now what they should be... really scary psychopaths, good or evil

That’s right, Time Burton was the responsible for putting some respect back into Batman he used as inspiration Frank Miller Dark Knight Returns (arguably the darkest Batman book to date) for his vision of Batman, and, I dare to say Batman wouldn’t be in this height if it wasnt for him.

Originally Posted by Kakashi

I disagree. I would definitely put Spiderman 2 in the top three, if not second. So would most critics, but it's a matter of personal preference. However Spiderman deserves to be placed in front of Iron Man because it was the first great superhero comic book adaptation, which set the standard and made films like Iron Man, Spiderman 2 and the recent Batman films as good as they are. The Dark Knight is the continuation and perfection of that model, the blend of breathtaking special affects and intresting plot.

1. The Dark Knight
2. Spiderman 2 ->
3. Batman Begins <-
4. Spiderman
5. Iron Man

----

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

And, yes, I agree with kakashi-san, Spiderman 2 deserves to be in the top 3 superhero movies more than Iron Man.

I really never got why People rank so high Spider Man 2, And I’m a hard core spidie fan, and there are a lot of problems going on with the Sam Raimi take on Peter Parker/Spider Man. specifically in part 2 and 3.

Even like that, For the Comic Book movie I have seen, I have to say it would go like this..

Batman Begins.
Iron Man
X-men
Spider Man

Of course in terms of favorites, its is a personal take on that, but Both Iron-Man and Batman have been considered to be the new trend in comic book movies, as called by a critic:

"“Batman” isn’t a comic book anymore. [...] This film, and to a lesser degree Iron Man, redefine the possibilities of the “comic-book movie.”

Perhaps, in the next movie, Bruce Wayne gets one step closer to falling into insanity, as per Frank Miller's vision in The Dark Knight Returns. After all, when one stares too long into the abyss, the abyss stares back at him.

I doubt it, Bat-Man was pushed back to that state in Dark Knight Returns thanks to various factors such as: all those years doing what he did, His decaying Physical state as he can barely keep up with the criminals, whatever happened to Superheroes in that futuristic DC universe, etc. In the other hand Nolan Batman is a Batman based on Batman early years, Nolan is using Batman Year one and The Long Halloween (sometimes referred to as Bat-Man year two) for inspiration.

At most, this is only going to set-up Batman to become what he is in the Comic Book world, and that is a character that it is more absorbed in his role as a vigilante and someone who is getting more and more distant from society.

Originally Posted by jonli

Most probably not, since Freeze is a pretty unrealistic villain.

Unless Christopher Nolan decides to strip him off all of his unrealistic qualities. Making him into a normal man that probably kills people and freezes their corpses.

I agree, Nolan is trying to do the most realistic take on Bat-Man he can possibly do, and Bat-Man has a lot of villains that can make the movie go well.

Originally Posted by MakubeX2

Ledger's Joker wil join the rank amongst the 100 greatest film villian.

And here's a trick question inspired by his performance :-

If Dr. Lecter and The Joker were to be locked into a single prison cell, who will walk out alive ?

Joker…He is immortal..(a Joke between some friends and I)

Originally Posted by kujoe

Robin? No, please no.

Nolan himself has publicly stated that there is not going to be any Robin in his films.

Robin was a response for the Sidekicks era back in the golden age, comic book writhers needed young adults in their comic book so a younger audience could relate better to these comic books.

Now days this doesn’t work, and even more less with Bat-Man, bat-man is a loner and dark character, bringing someone as Robin is the contradiction to what he is.

Originally Posted by Papaya

I think Nolan has already stated the Penguin won't be making an appearance since he's too "weird" for his take on the Batman universe.

Originally Posted by kujoe

I think the Penguin can be reworked, though I suppose it doesn't help that he's called the Penguin in the first place.

The penguin has been better as a secondary character, more or less on how Scarecrow was done, as a means to get to something. In the Bat-Man universe, you are going to find yourself with the Penguin been the owner of a nightclub, as a cover for criminal activities. (Penguin is basically the only Bat-Man villain that actually does time in prison, and not in Arkham.)

I can picture Bat-Man needing some info, and crashing Penguins joint to get some info out of him. In the last season of Bat Man animated series he was depained this way.

About his physique, He doesn’t need to be disfigured, you just need to put a chubby guy and that’s all. The Penguin made by Burton was an exaggeration on his physique, basically Burton took The Penguin name way too literal.

Originally Posted by james3wk

Too true. While I quite enjoy the dark and gritty Batman of Nolan's universe (as well as Miller and others), I have to say that I miss the amazing Detective and inventor that Batman is (he is known as the greatest detective of the DC universe for a reason). The Riddler could really bring these abilities to the forefront in various interesting Mystery/Thriller storylines.

Well, you don’t really need someone as the Riddler to bring that down, the Ridler basically gives away his secret with his riddles, whereas, its nice to see Bat-Man take a piece of cloth, found in the crime scene, and based on that tell exactly where the bad guys are hiding. (you just need to see JLA, to understand Rider is really not necessarily to put this quality of Bat-Man on screen)

This would come down more on how Nolan do his take on Batman detective skills, besides, this is still a Batman year one experience so to say, and if you have read that book, Bat-Man doesn’t do that much, if any.

Originally Posted by kujoe

So what would the Joker be? Chaotic Neutral? CN can be interpreted in many ways, being the most flexible of alignments—ranging from the insane all the way to the "free spirit" who makes his own rules. Somehow, pure Chaotic Evil just doesn't fit the Joker.

He is a Sadistic Violent Sociopath.

[RandomGuy]

Originally Posted by Rurik

The penguin has been better as a secondary character, more or less on how Scarecrow was done, as a means to get to something. In the Bat-Man universe, you are going to find yourself with the Penguin been the owner of a nightclub, as a cover for criminal activities. (Penguin is basically the only Bat-Man villain that actually does time in prison, and not in Arkham.)

I can picture Bat-Man needing some info, and crashing Penguins joint to get some info out of him. In the last season of Bat Man animated series he was depained this way.

Seconded. As a criminally-inclined nightclub owner and "gentleman thief" who stays out of prison only as long as he continues to provide Batman with useful information, he would fit rather well into Nolan's film series. Though changing out his white tie and tails for a suit (or worse) would completely ruin the reference to his name (on the other hand, maybe that's not entirely a bad thing).

Also, while someone mentioned bringing Talia into the picture before, why not use Talia as a way of introducing the fact that Ra's al-Ghul is immortal? I can picture her seeking out the Batman with a request to track down her "long-lost father", only with the clues pointing him towards his former mentor (as well as ever greater peril). He could confront her about what he thinks is a ruse designed as revenge for letting her father die, only to find himself on the receiving end of derisive laughter for even thinking that Ra's al-Ghul could be killed. And of course, the events of the previous film are just more fodder for Liam Neeson to give a "now look at what you've done; Gotham really would be better off destroyed, wouldn't it" type speech. (After all, his view of the world is moral, after a fashion: to preserve the species, he and his band cut out the corruption and decay, and being around as long as he has, individuals or even individual cities are insignificant.) The only problem is what to do from there, since after you've admitted that he's immortal, it becomes rather hard to dispose of him in convincing fashion...

[Papaya]

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

Seconded. As a criminally-inclined nightclub owner and "gentleman thief" who stays out of prison only as long as he continues to provide Batman with useful information, he would fit rather well into Nolan's film series. Though changing out his white tie and tails for a suit (or worse) would completely ruin the reference to his name (on the other hand, maybe that's not entirely a bad thing).

Also, while someone mentioned bringing Talia into the picture before, why not use Talia as a way of introducing the fact that Ra's al-Ghul is immortal? I can picture her seeking out the Batman with a request to track down her "long-lost father", only with the clues pointing him towards his former mentor (as well as ever greater peril). He could confront her about what he thinks is a ruse designed as revenge for letting her father die, only to find himself on the receiving end of derisive laughter for even thinking that Ra's al-Ghul could be killed. And of course, the events of the previous film are just more fodder for Liam Neeson to give a "now look at what you've done; Gotham really would be better off destroyed, wouldn't it" type speech. (After all, his view of the world is moral, after a fashion: to preserve the species, he and his band cut out the corruption and decay, and being around as long as he has, individuals or even individual cities are insignificant.) The only problem is what to do from there, since after you've admitted that he's immortal, it becomes rather hard to dispose of him in convincing fashion...

The Ra's al Ghul in Nolan's universe isn't immortal--or rather, there is no indication that he is. Besides, he died in an explosion. Even the other versions of Ra's would not be able to survive something like that.

[bbduece]

Ra's al Ghul has mystic like powers in the other versions, but C.Nolan's work is trying to humanize Batman's enemies. So i think Ra's is dead, it would undermine the feel of C.Nolan's Batman if they do weird stuff like resurect someone on a whim. Plus Batman got plenty of enemies for part 3.

This movie is a cash cow now so they are probably in the process of starting the next one.

Hands down the best on screen Batman ever. Dark Knight has the set bar high for other super heroe movies to come.

"RIP Heath Ledger, you did a phenemenal job"

[Daughter!]

Originally Posted by Papaya

Spoiler:

The death of Harvey Dent. He's a major player in the series in general, so I was hoping he'd survive for another movie at least. Or is he not dead?

Spoiler:

I thought of that too, but in the end I remembered what Nolan had said, that he didn't think of his movies in terms of trilogies or sequels, but simply in making the best movie he could. Now, Two-Face in this movie didn't have enough going for him to hold another movie. He wasn't super-powered, he wasn't particularly strong or a very skilled fighter, he wasn't a criminal mastermind like the Joker was. He was just one crazy guy with hostages. The true significance of Two-Face as a villain in this movie was the tragedy of Gotham's white knight losing it all and falling so low, not that he was a particularly big threat.

I'm trying to look at this movie as a real drama, and not a superhero movie, and when you look at it this way it works out much better with Two-Face dying here. Of course, I can perfectly understand looking at this as a superhero movie, since that's what it is supposed to be.

Spoiler:

Am I the only one who saw Two-Face coming a mile away as soon as I saw the double-sided coin? Granted, I was pretty sure Two-Face would be in this film because of Harvey Dent, but at first I thought, "You never know." but with the coin, he was straight up predictable.

Best Joker quote: "I'm no monster...I'm just ahead of the curve."