The Dark Knight... yay or nay?

Topic: Yu-Gi-Oh - the gentleman's game

Users: @Alexander @gkscotty {@Graham[writing]} @SuzyQ Beb Chris Enhas fellranger Mr_Snake Terry

irc.simpworks.com

[Shockwave]

Okay, I'm debating whether to go and see this, and hoping that those of you that have might be able to give me an idea of whether I should go and see it on the big screen or wait for DVD.

I'm a big Batman fan, and I really liked Jack Nicholson's Joker in the Tim Burton Batman movie. He seemed that perfect mix between murderous psychopath and insane jokester. As did Mark Hamill's Batman Animated Joker, albeit toned down a little to be suitable for kids.

Now, the reason I state this is that from what I've seen my main concern lies with Heath Ledger's Joker in this film. I've read good reviews from the Hollywood press, but then I never trust them, and wonder if they're perhaps overstating things because of the actor's death a little. Maybe it's a case of bad advertising, but The Joker in this film comes across to me more as simply some paint-faced goon from a lame slasher flick than the maniacal Joker I love. I basically want to know, does he pull off the crazy, laughing fan of demented and sick pranks as well, or is he just Jason or Freddie with face paint instead of a hockey mask or claws? Also, do they get his background and origin, etc. correct?

I don't mind spoilers, btw. I've already read a few. I'd just like an opinion from fans of Batman, rather than just hollywood reviewers who aren't neccessarily fans of the medium.

[Archonix]

Having not seen it I can't be sure, however I have it on good authority that the film is actually a lot better than you'd think from the previews.

[Stretch Dude]

I have seen it, and lemme tell you: Yay. Most definitely yay. Ledger owns the whole damn movie. He's a very different Joker than Hamill or Nicholson, but he's definitely the cackling psycho he's supposed to be. They don't really touch on his background or origin beyond "Mad Love"-esque recounts of how he got his scars.

I will warn you, though: The title is accurate. This movie is quite dark.

[D.B.]

Saw this on Sunday. I'm not a huge superhero film fan, and only really went because other people wanted to see it, so don't quite fit your target revier profile. However, for what it's worth, i though the joker was probably the best single element of the film (and having heard so many rave reviews before hand, I went in sceptical). The rest I could take or leave. There's maybe a little more horror film antagonist in him than most batman villans, but they've cherry picked the better elements and mixed in a hell of a lot of little items that felt inspired by certain current events to me without being too heavy handed. It works.

[Molloy the Catburglar]

Loved it to pieces.  Definite Must-See for the big screen first.

[Shockwave]

Okay, I saw it a couple of days ago. Thoughts below:-

Spoiler (hover to show)

Overall, I thought it was an extremely good film. Very dark, and very much like Batman for the most part. I can't say I'd give it the perfect 10 that a lot of people are, and I have to say, I was actually far more impressed by the use of Harvey Dent and his descent into becoming Two-Face than by The Joker himself. I loved the overall theme and message of the film, and what The Joker represented and was doing here. In many ways, this was far more like the darker Joker from the darker 1980's comics that Frank Miller pioneered than any other portrayal so far, which was good. I'm glad that horrid bat-tank from the first movie is now destroyed, i.e. the only thing that really bugged me about Batman Begins. The casting was top-knotch, particuarly Harvey Dent and Gary Oldman (who was in the first movie too, I know, but really shone here as the best live-action Commissioner Gordon I've seen.)

And now, onto some nitpicks (come on, you should know that I would  ).

The Joker. Now don't get me wrong... for the most part, he was brilliantly played. The actions and his cross between the insane and the more-sane-than-anyone were spot on. I didn't end up getting that "slasher flick" vibe from him that I feared either. His sense of humour was spot-on, as were his lies, his various betrayals, his view on things, etc. He even had the classic Joker moment of pointing out how he and Batman are so very alike. However, two small niggles: 1) his face is just painted. What ever happened to the true origin of The Joker? 2) he lacked a little of the dignity The Joker is supposed to have. He's supposed to be the Clown Prince of Crime, and be somewhat flamboyant as well as dark and sadistic. This Joker was a little too scruffy and fidgety for my tastes... more like the Clown Hobo of Crime instead. I would have liked a little more of the Joker cackle too, but that's a minor niggle.

Secondly, Gotham City didn't look very gothic. It just looked like a standard city and happened to be filmed more at night than during the day. Sure, it's not as bad as the Schumacher (sp?) Las Vegas style Gotham, but at least Burton made an effort to give his Gotham City that gothic look, as did the animated series. Gotham City here might as well be New York or something. Fairly minor, but I'm somewhat of a purist when it comes to how I like my Batman.

My final, and main, niggle is actually one that I'm surprised people have swallowed, and is far more, well... movie-harming. While The Joker was just a tad off and I can fully accept it, the following just came across as retarded, and proof that these days no matter how good a movie otherwise is, Hollywood seems to put something in to utterly stupid as to near ruin it. I speak of the ridiculous cellphone sonar mapping moments. Seriously... WTF?! It still floors me. I know the fundamental idea behind the whole thing is somewhat sound, and I actually liked the moral issues it raised (particuarly with Lucius Fox), but to use it to his degree in this quasi CSI-meets-The Matrix complete mapping of absolutely every fucking dust spore in Gotham was really stupid, and a little too Deus Ex'y to boot. I know Batman was desperate, and that he'd probably at this point use anything at his disposal to catch The Joker, but this... this was just stupid. And brought an otherwise fantastic film into the realms of Die Hard 4 territory.

Overall, great film. Very dark, very Batman for the most part. Brilliantly acted and plotted. But let down by one single stupid plot-device. I have to say, I'm still going to state Tim Burton's original Batman movie as being my favourite. It had some minor issues too, but it didn't have Batman perfectly mapping an entire city using cellphones as a major plot device. The real winner for me though was Harvey Dent/Two-Face here. I actually feel it was far better than that of The Joker's personally, both for comic adaption accuracy and for Eckhart's performance.

[A Spy in Mancunia]

I've seen it now, haven't got around to writing a review, but I agree with Kenneth on most things. A great Batman film, and strongly recommended.

Harvey certainly stole the show, even from Batman himself as far as I'm concerned. I might start a new thread just to explain everything this film did right about him.

[D.B.]

RE: kenneth

Spoiler (hover to show)

My final, and main, niggle is actually one that I'm surprised people have swallowed, and is far more, well... movie-harming. While The Joker was just a tad off and I can fully accept it, the following just came across as retarded, and proof that these days no matter how good a movie otherwise is, Hollywood seems to put something in to utterly stupid as to near ruin it. I speak of the ridiculous cellphone sonar mapping moments. Seriously... WTF?! It still floors me. I know the fundamental idea behind the whole thing is somewhat sound, and I actually liked the moral issues it raised (particuarly with Lucius Fox), but to use it to his degree in this quasi CSI-meets-The Matrix complete mapping of absolutely every fucking dust spore in Gotham was really stupid, and a little too Deus Ex'y to boot. I know Batman was desperate, and that he'd probably at this point use anything at his disposal to catch The Joker, but this... this was just stupid. And brought an otherwise fantastic film into the realms of Die Hard 4 territory.

Ahha - yes, I hated this too. And for the record I'm not convinced the fundamental idea is sound. This, the bat tank (which at least didn't do anything we hadn't seen in the previous film - until it transformed into a bike...) and the fingerprint reconstruction by virtual bullet shard mapping (also unconvinced it's possible) could all have been left out and would have improved the film.

At times like this though, i do remind myself it's a story about a man dressed as a bat fighting crime with gizmos.

[Shockwave]

Spoiler (hover to show)

Oh, yeah... I forgot about the bullet fingerprint thing too. I remember thinking "WTF?!" at that too, but I think the cellphone thing made me forget that one.

[Archonix]

Actually both of those things are feasible with current or very near future technologies. Out of the two, the sonar system could be implemented right now if someone had access to every phone in existence.

It is a super hero movie...

[Shockwave]

Actually both of those things are feasible with current or very near future technologies. Out of the two, the sonar system could be implemented right now if someone had access to every phone in existence.

Perhaps... but to that degree? Seems extremely far-fetched. And while I believe that the type of bullet/gun could be determined from the shard fragments, I doubt they could determine a fingerprint from it. That seems even more far-fetched to me.

[A Spy in Mancunia]

Is Batman's gliding-cape feasible?

Because I know screw all about physics, but I'm certain that if we could do that, people would.

[Molloy the Catburglar]

Guys, as good as it is, it's still a Comic Book Movie.

He's Batman.  He can do anything he wants.  Because he's Batman.

[Archonix]

He's the god-damn batman. He can breath in space!

[D.B.]

Actually both of those things are feasible with current or very near future technologies. Out of the two, the sonar system could be implemented right now if someone had access to every phone in existence.

I remain sorely unconvinced. However...

It is a super hero movie...

This is surely the salient point