"The Dark Knight"... NOT the greatest movie EVAR!!!!1111one (WARNING: SPOILERS)

[Listener]

SPOILERS!!!!!







I haven't seen a thread for it, so I'm going to start this.

I liked "The Dark Knight".  I really did.  I thought the music, the scenery, the acting, all were good.  Heath Ledger was at least as good as Jack Nicholson (which means I may have thought he was better, which a lot of my friends didn't get).  The death of Commissioner Gordon was well-played and I really, truly didn't expect it to play out the way it did.  But then, I guess in the same way that the death of Shepherd Book un-primed us for the death of Wash, so did Gordon's un-prime us for Rachel's.

I really didn't like the whole Two-Face angle.  I think a potentially-deep character was wasted in dying so soon.  The Joker is still alive, as is Scarecrow (IIRC), so we have those villains to recycle as needed, but there was so much more that could've been done with Two-Face and he's wasted as a "let's just get revenge on everyone in as fair a manner as possible."  The character himself was played and written well.

I picked up that Ramirez was going to be the inside person by the end of Act One.

Anyway... I liked it.  But it wasn't the greatest movie ever.  Does that make me a bad geek, refusing to admit that I HEART TDK and Heath Ledger ZOMG OSCAR PERFORMANCE FTW is not my opinion?  All my geek friends are getting on my case for not totally marking out over TDK.  The only reason I even saw it in theaters is because my parents were in town and my wife and I wanted to get out of the house for a few hours so we left my daughter with them.

PS: Mods, if this needs to be rolled into another thread, please let me know.

[DKT]

I'm not reading this because I haven't actually seen it yet but wanted to tell you thanks, anyway.  I haven't read a single bad review of the movie yet, and was getting worried that my expectations could never be met.  So thanks for dropping it a few pegs for me.  Maybe now it has a chance

[Ocicat]

I really liked it, it was even better than Batman Begins.  But no, it wasn't amazingfantasticOMG!!!one!

I was actually okay with the way they used Two Face.  No, he's not around for another movie, but I'm not sure another movie with him would have been *good*.  They hit the high points for the character really efficiently.  Drawing him out over a whole film is either going to make him totally unsympathetic, or worse, just another gangster with a gimmick - as he so often is in the comics.

No, what I had a problem with was suspending disbelief that the Joker got away with all this stuff.  He sure has a superpower to get tons of explosives into places without anybody suspecting a thing!  And to just walk around (or drive around) in place that there should be tons of cops, and yet there are not - or if there are, the cops for some reason don't have guns?  He should have been shot a few dozen times there, Batman or no.

But really?  It doesn't matter much - he's a stand in for suicide bombers anyway.

[Talia]

It was Ledger's performance that made it for me. Its been a while since a movie character got under my skin that way. Creeeeeeepyyy.

[Listener]

It was Ledger's performance that made it for me. Its been a while since a movie character got under my skin that way. Creeeeeeepyyy.

They blew it early with the disappearing pencil trick.  Once he did that, there's nothing more that could've really creeped me out.  Though the knife in the mouth was worrisome.

[Loz]

The thing I've loved about Nolan's films is that they have been genuinely creepy in a way most super-hero films never try to be. There is nothing admirable about his Joker, Scarecrow or Two-Face, sure, people will probably dress up the same for Hallowe'en (and Internet trolls are already using 'Why So Serious?' tags to try and shut down legitimate discussions) but they aren't even glamorous in the way that villains normally end up being. It was great seeing a Ledger performance that seemed to be the Joker of Arkham Asylum brought to life, and a Harvey Dent/Two-Face story from The Long Hallowe'en (IIRC). Combined with a more likeable Bruce Wayne this was a great and unsettling film, just a real shame about Ledger's untimely death.

[MacArthurBug]

yeeeh I agree. BUT: And this is a big one (haha) my newly teenaged daughter now hearts the bat. She wants to see more. She needs to see comic books. This movie, somehow- where no other action movie has managed to- geeked out my teenager. She truly thinks this is the BEST!!one!1! movie EVER. So.. just for getting my kid into something we can share... it gains more cool points.

[Loz]

Just don't ruin it by buying her Arkham Asylum or The Killing Joke but she might like The Long Hallowe'en.

[Ocicat]

Just don't ruin it by buying her Arkham Asylum or The Killing Joke but she might like The Long Hallowe'en.

How is buying her good stories in the movie's same dark tone ruining it?  You think she can't handle seeing where some of the movie's themes came from?!?

[stePH]

Just don't ruin it by buying her Arkham Asylum or The Killing Joke but she might like The Long Hallowe'en.

How is buying her good stories in the movie's same dark tone ruining it?  You think she can't handle seeing where some of the movie's themes came from?!?

Yes, what's wrong with The Killing Joke?  I thought it was brilliant, like most of Moore's work. 

(Haven't read the other two books mentioned.)

[Loz]

Because neither are anywhere near close to their best work, though in the case of AA I bought the anniversary edition with the scripts and saw that in several cases that Dave McKean appeared to decide to just ignore what Morrison had written and draw his own thing (although, to be fair, there may have been editorial interference that wasn't noted in the script). AA is, I think, a story for the fan, not the new enthusiast (which is not a slam against anyone at all).

TKJ is very pretty artistically but less interesting thematically. The biggest problem I have, coming back to it, is the shooting of Batgirl/Barbara Gordon, one of the biggest 'women in refrigerator' moments in DCs history. The film actually handles the whole 'anyone is one bad day away from becoming the Joker' story better than the book, which wraps it up with the Joker and Batman sharing a hearty guffaw despite all the people the former has killed or maimed.

[stePH]

Because neither are anywhere near close to their best work, though in the case of AA I bought the anniversary edition with the scripts and saw that in several cases that Dave McKean appeared to decide to just ignore what Morrison had written and draw his own thing ...

Ah, you had me at Dave McKean.  I've never liked his work.

[MacArthurBug]

Loz, thanks for the advice. I'm pretty careful to screen EVERYTHING that I put before this kid- mostly 'cause she is picky.  Generally if I think it's cool she well too.

[Loz]

(O/T)

Ah, you had me at Dave McKean.  I've never liked his work.

Whereas I really like it, I just dislike the fact that, on numerous occasions, the whole point of stories that Morrison has been trying to tell have been ruined by artists who apparently don't seem to understand and/or don't ask him about his scripts and end up drawing something different (see the penultimate issue of The Invisibles)
(/O/T)

[stePH]

(O/T)

Ah, you had me at Dave McKean.  I've never liked his work.

Whereas I really like it, I just dislike the fact that, on numerous occasions, the whole point of stories that Morrison has been trying to tell have been ruined by artists who apparently don't seem to understand and/or don't ask him about his scripts and end up drawing something different (see the penultimate issue of The Invisibles)
(/O/T)

My local library has a copy of Arkham Asylum and I almost checked it out ... but briefly paging through it I saw McKean's usual and gave it a pass. 

He's also kept me from buying several Neil Gaiman books such as Mr. Punch.

[Planish]

I rather liked Ledger's Joker. I'm glad he didn't try to laugh maniacally all through the movie though, because he couldn't pull it off.

Things got confusing for me from around the hospital bombing onward. Too many quick location changes, lots of hard-to-hear talking, and so on. Still entertaining though. Our little local theatre has a Tuesday "cheap night", first-run movies for $5, so it was worth at least that much.

We sat right through to the end of the credits. Nope - no surprise extra ending (a la Iron Man or Narnia:LW&W).

[Loz]

My local library has a copy of Arkham Asylum and I almost checked it out ... but briefly paging through it I saw McKean's usual and gave it a pass. 

He's also kept me from buying several Neil Gaiman books such as Mr. Punch.

I enjoyed Mr Punch, in fact I don't think there's anything of McKean's that I don't like, though I think he concentrates too much on how individual images look and he's not particularly strong on stringing them together into a coherent narrative.

His Vertigo Tarot set is beautiful, and he's just done another set of his own, which I really really want!

[Loz]

We sat right through to the end of the credits. Nope - no surprise extra ending (a la Iron Man or Narnia:LW&W).

Yeah, where was the scene asking Batman if he wanted to join The Avengers Initiative? 

[Darwinist]

We sat right through to the end of the credits. Nope - no surprise extra ending (a la Iron Man or Narnia:LW&W).

I missed the Iron Man extra.  What was it?

[stePH]

We sat right through to the end of the credits. Nope - no surprise extra ending (a la Iron Man or Narnia:LW&W).

I missed the Iron Man extra.  What was it?

Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury of S.H.I.E.L.D.

[slic]

I really enjoyed this movie.  The big motorcycle fight/chase scene was way to long, but that's about my only complaint.


*******************Spoilers*******************


For me this is how superhero tales are meant to be - it's about bigger themes, about archtypes and mythologies.  I've been a reader/collector for 30+ years now with Bats being one of my favourites.  And, personally, I found that Batman could easily have been a secondary character in this movie and it still would have been excellent.

Mr. Bales ridiculous gravelly voice annoyed me, so I was glad there was little dialog for him.

One of the best scenes in the movie was on the convict ferry when the felon throws the remote over the side!

And Two-Face isn't dead - sure we saw a body on the ground, but the funeral was for Harvey Dent the public persona.  I wouldn't be surprised if Two-Face made a cameo in the same way Scarecrow did.

There are many other interesting themes, but I leave them alone for now

Loz -I think you are completely wrong about The Killing Joke. I also think you missed both the main point of the comic (which is opposite of the movie - in the movie Joker succeeded in "turning" Harvey Dent, and in the comic, he was entirely unsuccessful in "turning" James Gordon), and the meaning of the ending.  The joke was an explanation of why the Joker could never be able to stop himself, and the laughter was a sad reflection of both men's inability to cope with the grotesque consequences to come because of it.  I would even go so far as to say that Batman sees his own strict code, his own inability to kill the Joker (as he alluded to in the beginning of the story), is as much to blame as the Joker's flaws.

You are right about Brian Bolland's artwork though - it is moving.

I had never heard the term "women in refridgerator", and looked it up - quite interesting, but not overly surprising.  I think it is an unfair comment for this story though, keep in mind the story was written over 20 years ago.  Barbara's shooting was crucial to the story - the fact that she had a secret identity as Batgirl was inconsequential - her near fatal flaw was being Jim Gordon's daughter.
Also I think that keeping Barbara a parapalegic and much later giving her a fantastic purpose in the DCU has been far more interesting than magically curing her back a la Batman. 

MacArthurBug - glad to hear you screen the books.  I don't think The Killing Joke is any worse than the movie, but  find a difference in static gore and and bright explosions on the screen (In particular, the scene in the Chemical factory in the comic still gets to me).

I'm curious if your daugher is more into the herosim of the Batman or the chaotic nilism of the Joker.  The answer would change any recommendations I could make.  There are quite a few graphic novels out there.  Personally, I've enjoyed Batman in the Seventies - these came out just before my time, and I found them to be interesting stories with a serious undertone at times.

[Loz]

I had never heard the term "women in refridgerator", and looked it up - quite interesting, but not overly surprising.  I think it is an unfair comment for this story though, keep in mind the story was written over 20 years ago.

What has that got to do with anything?

  Barbara's shooting was crucial to the story - the fact that she had a secret identity as Batgirl was inconsequential

That is sort of the point of my complaint. I read The Killing Joke long before I got into the DCU so didn't even know Barbara Gordon was Batgirl.

Also I think that keeping Barbara a parapalegic and much later giving her a fantastic purpose in the DCU has been far more interesting than magically curing her back a la Batman. 

There's no connection between her L33T haxxor skillz and her being in a wheelchair. And this is a problem of the whole shared universes concept, John Stewart was in a wheelchair for a while, he can walk now, Superman was dead, Batman had a broken spine, they are both better now (over in Marvel-land Professor X is walking/not-walking with annoying repetition), the Mist got cured of his Alzheimers by demon-magic, but Barbara Gordon doesn't get let off? It's not like she has to give up being Oracle to go out swinging on the batrope round Gotham again.

[slic]

I had never heard the term "women in refridgerator", and looked it up - quite interesting, but not overly surprising.  I think it is an unfair comment for this story though, keep in mind the story was written over 20 years ago.

What has that got to do with anything?

I don't think I understand the meaning of "women in the refridgerator" the same way you do.  First off, the reference seems to kick off from a GL storyline with Kyle as the GL (way after Killing joke) and more importantly, at a time when killing off characters was the "vogue" way of ramping up the tension in DC comics.  I agree with the general premise that female characters get the dirty end of the stick in many cases, but I think it's more that 2nd string characters get the shafted, and there are just more female second stringers (that's a big injustice for another day).

The reason I think it's unfair to this story is a) Batgirl/Barbara may not have been an A-list player, but she wasn't an ordinary B-lister either.  She wasn't as disposible character, simply shot and forgetten (hence my Orcale comment later) and  b) The shooting had ripples, an impact far outside the story, similar to Wonder Woman killing Max Lord.

I agree that way too often the injured heroes get miracle cures, and that was my point too.  I agree that it is out of the norm in the superhero universe for her to remain crippled (In Final Crisis, at Martian Manhunter's funeral, Superman even referenced the possiblilty of resurrection since it happens so often). 
While I'm sure somewhere in a comic, some writer came up with a lame-ass excuse why she isn't cured, it doesn't matter to me.  Oracle in a wheelchair is way more interesting than another Bat-female. 

And I think that has more to do with why isn't cured than because she's a female character is a strongly skewed macho-oriented universe. Hence my arguement that this isn't a "woman in fridge"-type plot point.

[wintermute]

One of the best scenes in the movie was on the convict ferry when the felon throws the remote over the side!

I was watching that, and thinking "but, what if the saltwater shorts it triggering mechanism? What it it hits the side of the ship on the way down?" It was a nice sentiment, but criminally inept in its handling.

And Two-Face isn't dead - sure we saw a body on the ground, but the funeral was for Harvey Dent the public persona.  I wouldn't be surprised if Two-Face made a cameo in the same way Scarecrow did.

Two-Face needs to be dead. If he turns up later on, then it's going to completely destroy what Gordon and Batman achieved at the end. And if he wasn't dead, then what are the police supposed to do? Let him go, or arrest him? Which of those won't lead to disaster, at least in Gordon's mind? If he survived the fall, the least bad option is to put a bullet in his brain.

It's a shame, because I do think they've wasted Two-Face after a wonderful origin, but there's no way Gordon can allow him to leave the scene of the crime alive.

[MacArthurBug]

Slic: A little of both: Overall? I believe it's the heroisum. We watched Batman begins and she was almost as entranced with that one. I think she liked the Joker (Personally he's one of my fav. comic villans) as a bad guy, but she really loved Batmans gadgets, sadness, belief in justice, etc. Thanks for the feedback, I'm always so happy to find something I can geek out on with her.

[Loz]

It's a shame, because I do think they've wasted Two-Face after a wonderful origin, but there's no way Gordon can allow him to leave the scene of the crime alive.

On the other hand, a film with the tension of whether Two-Face steps out of the shadows and reveals that he is, in fact, Harvey Dent, to the general public (as opposed to the cops and frazzled bystanders) might be quite interesting.

[wintermute]

It's a shame, because I do think they've wasted Two-Face after a wonderful origin, but there's no way Gordon can allow him to leave the scene of the crime alive.

On the other hand, a film with the tension of whether Two-Face steps out of the shadows and reveals that he is, in fact, Harvey Dent, to the general public (as opposed to the cops and frazzled bystanders) might be quite interesting.

Two-Face isn't a behind-the-scenes Machiavellian. I can't imagine him being in the shadows in the first place. And Harvey Dent was famous enough that as soon as someone sees him from the right, they're pretty likely to recognise him. Anyone he comes into any kind of contact with is going to be pretty sure that he's Dent.

I suppose you could do it as "yes, the rumours are true: Dent is a mass-murdering bastard and the police faked his death to try and pin the blame on someone else", but not as "Gasp! Dent's still alive!", but given that that was exactly what they were trying to avoid it seems unlikely that Gordon and Batman would leave that possibility open.

But really, why would they stage an elaborate pantomime of a funeral if he wasn't really in the coffin? There are just too many ways it could blow up and destroy not only Gordon's career, but everything that funeral was meant to achieve.

[slic]

I agree that Bats and the Commish wanted to save Harvey's rep and give Gotham a shining example.  But, first off, I can easily see the discussion going along and no one really thinking long term/overall consequences, or at least thinking they could keep it under control (it's happened before - Chernobyl, Sex in the Oval Office, preachers having gay affairs....). 
Second, even if they did, it might go like this - Harvey's in Arkham getting plastic surgery and therapy, and they say to themselves, "once he's better, we'll tell everyone we faked his death for his own protection" (it worked for James Gordon . 
When people want something bad enough they can convince themselves of anything

Speaking of this, I was quite disappointed in the portrayal of Batman in two ways:
1)wanting out of the game so bad that he was willing to toss it all on Harvey's shoulders. 
2)If he really felt that a "normal" guy is what Gotham needed then why did he ever don the costume in the first place - why not become a public defender himself?  What's more of an example than a rich kid tossing it all away and working for the public good?

Way back in the comics they showed Bruce wanting to be a cop, but he found there were too many rules in the way.  Something may be just but illegal and vice versa.

[Loz]

Speaking of this, I was quite disappointed in the portrayal of Batman in two ways:
1)wanting out of the game so bad that he was willing to toss it all on Harvey's shoulders.

He was concerned that his presence was making things worse, encouraging criminals to become even more extreme to fight him and encouraging citizens to become more extra-curicular in their attempts to fight back. It's what seems to be becoming the standard 'second film hero doubts himself' motif, though done a lot better than Spiderman 2.

2)If he really felt that a "normal" guy is what Gotham needed then why did he ever don the costume in the first place - why not become a public defender himself?  What's more of an example than a rich kid tossing it all away and working for the public good?

There was nothing said about what Bruce would do next, so he could have well done something like you suggest. As for why he didn't do that in the first place, part of the reason he was so impressed by Dent was that he had helped clean up the GPD and assorted legal services, back when Bruce was ready to start out as Batman they were too much in the pay of the crime families.

[stePH]

Second, even if they did, it might go like this - Harvey's in Arkham getting plastic surgery and therapy,...

Like in The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller?  That didn't work, as I recall.

[slic]

Speaking of this, I was quite disappointed in the portrayal of Batman in two ways:
1)wanting out of the game so bad that he was willing to toss it all on Harvey's shoulders.

He was concerned that his presence was making things worse, encouraging criminals to become even more extreme to fight him and encouraging citizens to become more extra-curicular in their attempts to fight back.

Fair enough, I didn't get that, but I can see the point.

2)If he really felt that a "normal" guy is what Gotham needed then why did he ever don the costume in the first place - why not become a public defender himself?  What's more of an example than a rich kid tossing it all away and working for the public good?

There was nothing said about what Bruce would do next, so he could have well done something like you suggest. As for why he didn't do that in the first place, part of the reason he was so impressed by Dent was that he had helped clean up the GPD and assorted legal services, back when Bruce was ready to start out as Batman they were too much in the pay of the crime families.

Sorry, I'm not buying it.  Batman's always been driven and may have had the occasional crisis of faith but never about his "mission".  I didn't think it suited the character.

Second, even if they did, it might go like this - Harvey's in Arkham getting plastic surgery and therapy,...

Like in The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller?  That didn't work, as I recall.

Which actually helps makes my point.  Someone else thought it was a good idea too

[contra]

I loved the movie, bar one thing that nagged at me for the whole thing
*spoilers*



Why didn't anyone ever tell Dent that the Joker tricked Batman and the cops?
At times it felt like they went out of their way not to tell him that Batman said he was going after the girl.

Dent seemed to feel like Batman deliberatly saved him... and that Batman let Rachel die.  Not the case, the Joker lied and switched the locations.  I feel if Dent knew that the Joker lied at that moment, he may have been less willing to listen to the Joker at all.  No matter go all darkside on us in the end.

Its a simple explanation, that could have changed the whole course of the movie... probably why it never happened... but it annoyed me anyway.

Or maybe I missed something... tell me if I did...

[slic]

Why didn't anyone ever tell Dent that the Joker tricked Batman and the cops?
At times it felt like they went out of their way not to tell him that Batman said he was going after the girl.

That's very interesting.  I never thought of it that way.  Once I realized that he was saving Dent, I had assumed he yelled "The Girl!" or whatever at Gordon telling him to go get the girl.  That Bats selfishly chose getting Dent to "save" Gotham and himself.

[wakela]

Why didn't anyone ever tell Dent that the Joker tricked Batman and the cops?
At times it felt like they went out of their way not to tell him that Batman said he was going after the girl.

That's very interesting.  I never thought of it that way.  Once I realized that he was saving Dent, I had assumed he yelled "The Girl!" or whatever at Gordon telling him to go get the girl.  That Bats selfishly chose getting Dent to "save" Gotham and himself.

Yeah, me too.  I assumed I misheard Batman when he said he was going to save Rachel.  Thanks for clearing that up, Contra, it makes much more sense now.  Joker knew that Rachel's death would mess with both Batman and Dent.  Especially if it as perceived that her death could have been prevented.

[Listener]

A note on suspension of disbelief, from ESPN's Gregg Easterbrook:

The latest Batman installment is a hit, and well-made from a cinematography standpoint, but the Joker character was unrealism carried to an extreme, even by Hollywood's low standards. The Joker has hundreds of obedient, superefficient henchmen, including surgeons and high-ranking police officers, who serve him without question -- even though they know he murders his own henchmen. The Joker knows things no one could possibly know, such as what street the police van carrying Harvey Dent will turn down during a wild chase. (He has henchmen positioned on that street, one of dozens the van might have turned down). The Joker can get poison into the police commissioner's private office without anyone suspecting anything. City officials make a sudden decision to load several hundred people into ferries; in just a few hours, Joker is able to place thousands of pounds of explosives aboard the ferries without anyone noticing, plus rig devices to take over the ferries' engines. Joker is able to move thousands of pounds of explosives into Gotham General Hospital without anyone noticing. Positioning the explosives for the two giant-blast sequences in "The Dark Night" would have required large trucks and a front-loader carrying multiple heavy objects through places crawling with police officers without anyone noticing. Joker always knows exactly where everyone he wants to kill is in a huge city (how?); he's beaten to a pulp by Batman, yet just minutes later, easily overpowers a huge policeman; Joker steals from the mob, yet no mob soldier simply shoots him. Joker has a bomb sneaked into the jail where he's being held -- somehow he knew in advance what cell he would be in! -- and it blasts open the jail wall, plus kills all the police officers standing around the Joker, but does not hurt him.

I wonder how many people noticed that.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/080826

[Ocicat]

A note on suspension of disbelief, from ESPN's Gregg Easterbrook:

The latest Batman installment is a hit, and well-made from a cinematography standpoint, but the Joker character was unrealism carried to an extreme, even by Hollywood's low standards. The Joker has hundreds of obedient, superefficient henchmen, including surgeons and high-ranking police officers, who serve him without question -- even though they know he murders his own henchmen. The Joker knows things no one could possibly know, such as what street the police van carrying Harvey Dent will turn down during a wild chase. (He has henchmen positioned on that street, one of dozens the van might have turned down). The Joker can get poison into the police commissioner's private office without anyone suspecting anything. City officials make a sudden decision to load several hundred people into ferries; in just a few hours, Joker is able to place thousands of pounds of explosives aboard the ferries without anyone noticing, plus rig devices to take over the ferries' engines. Joker is able to move thousands of pounds of explosives into Gotham General Hospital without anyone noticing. Positioning the explosives for the two giant-blast sequences in "The Dark Night" would have required large trucks and a front-loader carrying multiple heavy objects through places crawling with police officers without anyone noticing. Joker always knows exactly where everyone he wants to kill is in a huge city (how?); he's beaten to a pulp by Batman, yet just minutes later, easily overpowers a huge policeman; Joker steals from the mob, yet no mob soldier simply shoots him. Joker has a bomb sneaked into the jail where he's being held -- somehow he knew in advance what cell he would be in! -- and it blasts open the jail wall, plus kills all the police officers standing around the Joker, but does not hurt him.

I wonder how many people noticed that.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/080826

Ya, I noticed that.  A lot.  From my first post in this thread:

No, what I had a problem with was suspending disbelief that the Joker got away with all this stuff.  He sure has a superpower to get tons of explosives into places without anybody suspecting a thing!  And to just walk around (or drive around) in place that there should be tons of cops, and yet there are not - or if there are, the cops for some reason don't have guns?  He should have been shot a few dozen times there, Batman or no.

But really?  It doesn't matter much - he's a stand in for suicide bombers anyway.

[Listener]

Ya, I noticed that.  A lot.  From my first post in this thread:

That was on July 23. How can I be expected to remember that?   

[Loz]

A note on suspension of disbelief, from ESPN's Gregg Easterbrook:

The latest Batman installment is a hit, and well-made from a cinematography standpoint, but the Joker character was unrealism carried to an extreme, even by Hollywood's low standards. The Joker has hundreds of obedient, superefficient henchmen, including surgeons and high-ranking police officers, who serve him without question -- even though they know he murders his own henchmen.

Arguable. We see a few policemen that he has the ability to manipulate, the rest are, as we see in the scene with Dent, Batman and the captured thug, apparently unstable psychotics who Bats says the Joker has chosen specifically because they will latch on to the first authority figure they see. The implication I took from cellphone-stomach guy was that the Joker had done it himself. I'm not sure it's ever made public knowledge or mob knowledge that the Joker can kill his lackeys and we only see it with the bank robbery guys from the start.

The Joker knows things no one could possibly know, such as what street the police van carrying Harvey Dent will turn down during a wild chase. (He has henchmen positioned on that street, one of dozens the van might have turned down).

The drivers were told to stop for nobody and nothing, they didn't have time to stop and think 'hmmm, burning truck', yes, to us going underground is a dumb move but when you have split-decision to make a decision how likely are you to make a good one? There weren't 'dozens of choices', presumably his police force contacts fed him the main route and he worked from that. It's not something 'no one could possibly know'.

The Joker can get poison into the police commissioner's private office without anyone suspecting anything.

This one is just silly really. Cleaning staff switch bottles perhaps, or one of the dirty cops is assigned to that detail or maybe it's switched at the point it's bought... Who knows?

City officials make a sudden decision to load several hundred people into ferries; in just a few hours, Joker is able to place thousands of pounds of explosives aboard the ferries without anyone noticing, plus rig devices to take over the ferries' engines.

I did wonder about this one, not that he did it, but when he found the time to organise it. Even accepting that in the general chaos that he created that some of his hoods had the time to do things just so? I think that possibly from the time that the foreign financier guy was dropped off at G.C.P.D. and the Joker killed off the black gangster that he started having access to Mob money and connections and got them to do some of the leg work for him, but it's a stretch. I think the whole thing of trying to convince Harvey that he's just a crazy that reacts to events is < gasp! > a lie, and he's quote capable of sitting down and rationally planning how to do insane things.

Joker is able to move thousands of pounds of explosives into Gotham General Hospital without anyone noticing. Positioning the explosives for the two giant-blast sequences in "The Dark Night" would have required large trucks and a front-loader carrying multiple heavy objects through places crawling with police officers without anyone noticing.

As above. Maybe much less explosive connected to the points in a hospital building that could be used to make a bigger explosion? Again, disguise his hoods as police/firemen storming into the evacuating hospital with 'equipment' to help evacuate it and they could position it for him. You still have the time problem but I don't think it's an impossible supposition.

Joker always knows exactly where everyone he wants to kill is in a huge city (how?);

I don't understand this one. He targets people at their offices or places of residence, going after Harvey at A BIG FUNDRAISER for Harvey Dent isn't an example of telepathy.

he's beaten to a pulp by Batman, yet just minutes later, easily overpowers a huge policeman;

Just as the Batman is able to escape the G.C.P.D. despite being on his last legs at the end of the film. Perhaps the Joker is crazy enough that he simply ignores the beating he gets from Batman? We don't know exactly what happens in the cell before we see him with the policeman as hostage.

Joker steals from the mob, yet no mob soldier simply shoots him.

Pencil! Hand grenades! The black mob guy puts out the contract on the Joker and gets bumped off. The other gangsters then have the problem of what to do about their money and Dent. Maybe they decide to let him go after Dent and then kill him afterwards?

Joker has a bomb sneaked into the jail where he's being held -- somehow he knew in advance what cell he would be in! -- and it blasts open the jail wall, plus kills all the police officers standing around the Joker, but does not hurt him.

The thing about which cell he would be in is irrelevant, he wasn't in a cell at the time. The cell the guy with the bomb in his gut is is also irrelevant, I presume that most police stations have only one block of cells? We also do not know that it kills the policemen around the Joker, if he knows what's coming and they don't, maybe he can brace himself for the blast they aren't expecting? Perhaps it throws them off balance long enough for him to kill them?


I'm not claiming that tDK is the bestest film in the history of everything and certainly there are times in the story when the Joker has to rely on 'movie luck' or The Scriptwriter to help him, but if you want a truly egregious example of that we could talk about the end of the last Harry Potter book and tDK is not THAT bad.

[stePH]

Against my better judgment, I checked Arkham Asylum from my local library.  I just finished reading it.

Good god, what a piece of shit.  Well, the writing wasn't bad, but any hope of making a decent book was utterly destroyed by Dave McKean.  It might have been enjoyable in the hands of another artist, but McKean being Mckean it was nearly impossible to determine just what was supposed to be happening in the story.

Feh.

[DKT]

Finally saw this last night. Absolutely was blown away by it.

I did like Dent's use in this movie.  I thought Aaron Eckhart gave the character an amazing amount of depth and bravado that to see him brought to his knees was heart-breaking.  From punching the mobster who tried to shoot him on the stand to giving his I am Spartacus Batman speech.  I've always liked Two-Face as a character.  Before this movie, Two Face on celluloid was a ridiculous henchman to the Jim Carrey vaudeVillian, as disposable as the comics given out on Free Comic Book Day.  Here, he was given an arc.  And boy did it hurt.

(I was actually expecting Dent to somehow live and Joker to die.  I was pretty surprised they went the other route, but it worked out perfectly for me in the end.)

Heath Ledger.  Was that Heath Ledger?  Really?  If I didn't know better, I'm not sure I would believe it.

Christian Bale is great.  I loved the Batmen army and how that got to him.  I loved his doubt.

The supporting cast: Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine -- also very good.  I loved Jim Gordon in this movie.

I don't know if I'd call this the best movie ever.  I'm not sure there really is a definitive best movie ever.  But I do think Nolan raised the bar here, not only on his own franchise (which IMO already had one of the best made comic book movies) but with comic book movies in general. He deserves all kinds of awards for pulling this off, IMO.  I'm glad the studio is being patient about everything with him, and I'm really curious and excited to see where he can possibly go next. 

Now I need to hunt down the Long Halloween.  Never did read that one.  Also, maybe catch up with the current title and see what Grant Morrison's doing with it.

[stePH]

Now I need to hunt down the Long Halloween.  Never did read that one.  Also, maybe catch up with the current title and see what Grant Morrison's doing with it.

The Long Halloween is made of awesome.  It's everything Arkham Asylum wasn't -- readable, for one example.

[DKT]

Now I need to hunt down the Long Halloween.  Never did read that one.  Also, maybe catch up with the current title and see what Grant Morrison's doing with it.

The Long Halloween is made of awesome.  It's everything Arkham Asylum wasn't -- readable, for one example.

Dude, you need to stay far away from anyting involved with Dave McKean 

[stePH]

Dude, you need to stay far away from anyting involved with Dave McKean 

I already knew that, of course.  I did say that I checked out AA against my better judgment.

I'll still except things that he's polluted only minimally:  Sandman, Neverwhere and such.  And Mirrormask was tolerable.

[Alasdair5000]

'Son of the Demon', the first story is a bit kludgy for me.  However, I have it on very good authority that the whole run coheres beautifully.  Definitely worth tracking down and if DC are even half sensible they'll be putting it out in cheap trades quickly.

[DKT]

'Son of the Demon', the first story is a bit kludgy for me.  However, I have it on very good authority that the whole run coheres beautifully.  Definitely worth tracking down and if DC are even half sensible they'll be putting it out in cheap trades quickly.

Yeah, I've heard the first arc kind of misfires...but then Morrison returns to form after that.  I don't know if that means the first volume is necessary (or at all fun) to read, though. 

I think I'll start off by reading some of the other Batman TPBs I've got on my shelves.

[Loz]

'Son of the Demon', the first story is a bit kludgy for me.  However, I have it on very good authority that the whole run coheres beautifully.  Definitely worth tracking down and if DC are even half sensible they'll be putting it out in cheap trades quickly.

Sadly both DC and Marvel now seem to think it's a great idea to put their comic collections out in harback first. I don't mind it as a prestige format for stuff that's already been out in paperback (I read Starman in trades from the library but am happy to buy the prestige hardbacks for my own collection) but this looks like trying to milk more money from the fans than have something that the more casual reader might feel inclined to pick up.

Luckily I'm downloading the few comics that I fancy reading but am not sure whether I'd buy, so I can wait for them to get round to putting out TPBs of the collections I want. The 'Return of Ra's Al Ghul' stuff can be ignored but the rest of Morrison's run is very interesting.

[Russell Nash]

Just got this through netflix.

It's a big steaming turd sandwich!

[Bdoomed]

*jaw drops open and guts spill out*

[Anarquistador]

Coming in late, but I would like to weigh in.

First off, I am not the biggest comic book geek in the world, but I did always love Batman. And while I did enjoy Batman Begins and The Dark Knight a goodly amount, the more I think about them the less I like them, because the more I consider the details, the less...Batman-y they seem.

One of the things I always enjoyed about the character of Batman was his self-made, obsessive nature. This idea that he spent his entire life transforming his mind and body into this crimefighting machine, and that he did it almost completely on his own, with help from a select few people. In Batman Begins, Bruce Wayne is a relatively normal human being until he's about 20 or so, where he runs off to Asia to find himself, then he comes back to town and makes friends with Morgan Freeman. Who just HAPPENS to have a spare super-suit lying around. It sort of detracts from the grandness of Batman, that larger-than-life thing he had going. I like the idea of Batman meticulously crafting this persona, hand-making every gadget and going over every clue. I don't really get that sense from the movies.

The Dark Knight was something of an improvement, though, because it managed to do something no previous movie - or even the 1990s animated series - managed to do: it made the Joker really, REALLY scary. The idea that he was just this pure sadist, causing chaos and destruction purely for the sake of it, really got under my skin. It's a real shame that Heath Ledger is no longer with us, though; that kind of performance can never be repeated. We'll never see the Joker again in another movie.

(and just to be completely petulant, it irks me that all of the main actors in these movies are British. Christian Bale, Gary Oldman, Cillian Murphy...well, I guess Heath Ledger's Australian, but stilll. I mean, Batman is perhaps the quintessentially American comic book character, and they couldn't find an American actor to play him? Harumph.)

[Loz]

Consider it revenge for 'Prince of Thieves' consisting entirely of Americans except for the baddy. 

[Listener]

Consider it revenge for 'Prince of Thieves' consisting entirely of Americans except for the baddy. 

I enjoyed Christian Slater as Will Scarlet.

[Listener]

One of the things I always enjoyed about the character of Batman was his self-made, obsessive nature. This idea that he spent his entire life transforming his mind and body into this crimefighting machine, and that he did it almost completely on his own, with help from a select few people. In Batman Begins, Bruce Wayne is a relatively normal human being until he's about 20 or so, where he runs off to Asia to find himself, then he comes back to town and makes friends with Morgan Freeman. Who just HAPPENS to have a spare super-suit lying around. It sort of detracts from the grandness of Batman, that larger-than-life thing he had going. I like the idea of Batman meticulously crafting this persona, hand-making every gadget and going over every clue. I don't really get that sense from the movies.

So you're more of the "Mask of the Phantasm" school of thought, then?

[Anarquistador]

Never seen Mask of the Phantasm. But I did think the animated series was pretty spot-on, so if it's set in the same continuity, it's probably pretty close.