The Dark Knight

this might have spoilers:





from begins to DK it's been a year. the joker says it when he meets the mafia.

As for the time jump in the film. I think it might be a few weeks from the time the joker escapes and harvey is blown away to the final act of the film.

I would say each new day is almost a new week or couple of days. except for the time harvey turns him self in and the interrogation scene.

Plus if you notice since the first batman begins, he had an interest on ease dropping from the head set to spying. I believe once he found the technology and saw what fox could do with it he applied it. remember Bruce wayne is not a dummy, he has some intelligence plus it's something that could have been started before he reassigned those who he had work on it so he could have his personally sonar system.
 
David Jimerson said:
But Nolan's been going around playing up the "realism" of the film for months. He sees it as more than a comic book movie.

But again, the point I'm making there is that you can't hype the "realism" of the movie and then just say "comic book movie" every time the realism is challenged.
Click to expand...

I think the problem really lies in the fact people have a hard time believing in a world that is really close to there own but slightly different. If I lived in a world where a guy dressed like a bat is chasing a guy dressed up like clown who is going around and blowing up buildings and people just to prove a sick point, I could absolutely believe everything else I saw in DK. The "realism" created in the movie only has to live up to the world it takes place in. The world created by the film maker. It doesn't have to live up to our world’s realism. I just think Nolan’s world in DK is so close to our own that people have a hard time swallowing the over the top content like a guy in a bat suit, a clown with a taste for mayhem, or a man with half a face and an obsession with chance. I can see why Burton and Schumacher chose to go the campy route. They couldn't believe in a gritty world that had a guy in a bat suit. Nolan could and I'm glad he did. In my opinion he has made not only the best two Batman movies but probably two of the best movies to come out in a very long time.
 
jontuttle - you are speaking of the uncanny valley theory. The closer you get to reality the more people are distracted by the differences. It's an interesting phenomenom.

Strangely enough, the opposite happens for me with TDK. The reality adds weight for me and raises the stakes of my engagement with the movie.

Kinda like that movie Primer that came out a couple years ago. The environment of the movie was closer to reality than any other time travelling movie I had ever seen. It was totally thrilling for me to feel like it was real while the movie was happening, and it also sticks with me longer and often disturbs me.

I love how the bat vehicles in TDK were all real, running machines. That kinda sh*t is what sells the movie for me.

My brain is just wired that way I guess.
 
jontuttle said:
I think the problem really lies in the fact people have a hard time believing in a world that is really close to there own but slightly different. If I lived in a world where a guy dressed like a bat is chasing a guy dressed up like clown who is going around and blowing up buildings and people just to prove a sick point, I could absolutely believe everything else I saw in DK. The "realism" created in the movie only has to live up to the world it takes place in. The world created by the film maker. It doesn't have to live up to our world’s realism. I just think Nolan’s world in DK is so close to our own that people have a hard time swallowing the over the top content like a guy in a bat suit, a clown with a taste for mayhem, or a man with half a face and an obsession with chance. I can see why Burton and Schumacher chose to go the campy route. They couldn't believe in a gritty world that had a guy in a bat suit. Nolan could and I'm glad he did. In my opinion he has made not only the best two Batman movies but probably two of the best movies to come out in a very long time.
Click to expand...

I don't object to the guy in the bat suit.
 
Tuttle: Great post. Thanks for giving me another way to think about it. Your followup, as well, Jim.
 
I think the realistic look of the film is one of the reaons the general public is embracing the movie so much. They are tired of CGI cartoons and find it invigorating to watch something that feels much more credible than they've gotten used to. While the look is a departure from the first, part of it is due to the fact that so much more of it takes place in the daytime. In reading the American Cinematographer piece on the film, it was very much a conscious decision to shoot this way by Nolan.
 
I still want to see this on IMAX. Probably going to try to this weekend... I just hope it keeps making MONEY!

BEAT THE SHIP!!
 
I think there are also two other notions in debate here- "realistic" vs "serious". I'm not saying camp is the best approach. Just that "Dark Knight realistic" wasn't the best way to portrait Batman and its characters. This, of course, is a personal opinion.

300, for example, is a serious film done in an expressionistic way. Or "Nosferatu", back in the 20'ies.

While obviously Sin City borders the line of "Serious" and "camp", I believe that in a Stylized world, Batman, a stylized character, would work better.

On the other hand, "The Joker" translated way better to the "real world". The makeup is realistic, the way he dresses is also believable... The same cannot be said about Batman and Two face.

Anyway, its breaking box office records. It surely is an entertaining film. But its still not the definitive Batman.

As for the role of Catwoman... I would be all for Angelina Jolie... 3 years ago. I sincerely do not know what happened, but she does not look half as good as she did in the "Bone Collector" days... Also, I'm not so sure how fit she'll be after the twins... Maybe Johannson would be a better fit...
 
Brandon Rice said:
I still want to see this on IMAX. Probably going to try to this weekend... I just hope it keeps making MONEY!

BEAT THE SHIP!!
Click to expand...

Dude, you HAVE TO see it in Imax. If you go to Universal, get your tickets beforehand and get there early if you want a decent seat. They make you wait outside in a huge line. If you were really smart, you'd also buy a ticket to another movie starting half an hour before, get inside with that, wait near the Imax theater until they start letting people in from outside and then head up with your Dark Knight ticket. FYI, best seats are probably 3/4 of the way up near the back.
 
Brandon Rice said:
I still want to see this on IMAX. Probably going to try to this weekend... I just hope it keeps making MONEY!

BEAT THE SHIP!!
Click to expand...

Brandon, let me know when/where - maybe Tommy and I can meet you to see it. (He hasnt seen it at all, I've seen in on non-IMAX.)
 
Know a guy who lives in Aspen and went to see the movie last weekend.

Who else walks in but Jack Nicholson.

Unfortunately, he was a little too intimidated to ask of his opinion after.
 
SPZ said:
I think there are also two other notions in debate here- "realistic" vs "serious". I'm not saying camp is the best approach. Just that "Dark Knight realistic" wasn't the best way to portrait Batman and its characters. This, of course, is a personal opinion.
While obviously Sin City borders the line of "Serious" and "camp", I believe that in a Stylized world, Batman, a stylized character, would work better.

On the other hand, "The Joker" translated way better to the "real world". The makeup is realistic, the way he dresses is also believable... The same cannot be said about Batman and Two face.

Anyway, its breaking box office records. It surely is an entertaining film. But its still not the definitive Batman.

As for the role of Catwoman... I would be all for Angelina Jolie... 3 years ago. I sincerely do not know what happened, but she does not look half as good as she did in the "Bone Collector" days... Also, I'm not so sure how fit she'll be after the twins... Maybe Johannson would be a better fit...
Click to expand...
I actually agree with everything you said here, except for the Scarlet Johanson comment. I just don't like her for some reason. Angelina might be a little older and worn, but she has a certain charm in all of her roles... like Mr and Miss Smith. I could see that working in a cat suit.
 
Capt Quirk said:
Angelina might be a little older and worn, but she has a certain charm in all of her roles... like Mr and Miss Smith. I could see that working in a cat suit.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah! I can DEFINITELY see it!!!

sbxywvrxxd.jpg
 
I don't think director Nolan would choose a popular actress shown by the fans. He will choose such an actress that fans will blame him for this choice but then they see the film they will love her.
 
b.soysal said:
I don't think director Nolan would choose a popular actress shown by the fans. He will choose such an actress that fans will blame him for this choice but then they see the film they will love her.
Click to expand...
You mean, like the way the fans "love" Maggie Gylenhal? They weren't much happier with Katie Holmes, only happy it wasn't Gylenhal :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top