IGX

Jack wrote:

"The Dark Knight" is pure adrenaline. Returning director Christopher Nolan, having dispensed with his introspective, moody origin story, now puts the Caped Crusader through a decathlon of explosions, vehicle flips, hand-to-hand combat, midair rescues and pulse-pounding suspense.

Yawn. I've been exploded and hand-to-handed and midair rescued to death. I hope that stuff doesn't get in the way of the story. Looking forward to it.

Did anyone have to sit behind you?

BucketHead wrote:Did anyone have to sit behind you?

=D>

I thought it was brilliant, and if anything it could have been a little bit longer. Some of the scenes seem to have been edited a little too tightly. Other than that, it was a masterpiece. The scene with the eighteen wheeler was the action scene of the year, easily. All of the characters were great, and there was plenty of development; Gary Oldman's Jim Gordon character really shone here. Heath Ledger's Joker was one of the most terrifying screen villains of all time; some scenes were right out of a Saw movie. This was a dark, disturbing, but ultimately positive thriller that will be hard for Nolan to top.

I thought the ending worked.

What was the original ending?

The current ending is good. The movie was great. My only gripes, which are both very minor, is that Gotham City looked too much like Chicago (because it was) and Maggie Gyllenhall has a face that belongs on a basset hound.

Ledger is getting all of the credit for this portrayal of the Joker, and that's not quite fair. He did a fantastic job (and he's a dead, gay cowboy, blah, blah blah), but a big part of the reason why this is a good Joker movie is the writing. You saw plenty of "The Killing Joke" in this movie, and that's a good thing.

Pinky wrote:The current ending is good. The movie was great. My only gripes, which are both very minor, is that Gotham City looked too much like Chicago (because it was) and Maggie Gyllenhall has a face that belongs on a basset hound.

Ledger is getting all of the credit for this portrayal of the Joker, and that's not quite fair. He did a fantastic job (and he's a dead, gay cowboy, blah, blah blah), but a big part of the reason why this is a good Joker movie is the writing. You saw plenty of "The Killing Joke" in this movie, and that's a good thing.

Great movie.

The writing for the Joker was superb. Unfortunately, everyone after Ledger has a tall order to fill if they expect to play the joker in future movies.

Funny, I thought the same thing about Maggie Gyllenhall. What demented idiot did she have fuck to get that part. She looks like Droopy dog.

Everything was amazing from the Watchmen trailer to the credits. Goin back this weekend to peep the IMAX version.

Ledger's Joker was so great I was instantly depressed that we never get to see it again.

Okay, I think I'm the last person on the planet to see this, but I'll put in my two cents:

OMG IT WUZ AWSOME!

So not to spoil anything...

















is the second villain really dead? I was very surprised by that.

GoDogGo! wrote:So not to spoil anything...

















is the second villain really dead? I was very surprised by that.

I.... believe so. Hmmm....

Also, a coworker thinks that because of the way the mobster was twirling his cane when last you saw him, he's going to be the Riddler.

GoDogGo! wrote:Also, a coworker thinks that because of the way the mobster was twirling his cane when last you saw him, he's going to be the Riddler.

Eric Roberts? Hell fucking no. Of course... anyone is better than Jim Carrey.

GODDAMMIT! Now I have to go see it again!

LOL. That's pretty much how it goes.

LOL!

Ronald RayGun wrote:Everything was amazing from the Watchmen trailer to the credits. Goin back this weekend to peep the IMAX version.

Ledger's Joker was so great I was instantly depressed that we never get to see it again.

I saw the IMAX version, it was like you took every punch in the face yourself and the building swinging was a hell of a ride.

GREAT MOVIE!

What's up with the IMAX deal? At the cineplex I go to you have three choices for most blockbusters:

Normal

Director's Hall: Digital, wider pleather seats, more leg room, in seat concession service. You pay about $3-4 bucks for these amenities. The reason I choose it is that there are fewer negros acting like idiots during the film due to the surcharge.

IMAX: pretty much the same as Director's with the IMAX curved screen. Is the IMAX experience worth it? I don't see the curved screen offering much. If you are already getting digital what's the advantage?

Thanks.

onealjn wrote:What's up with the IMAX deal? At the cineplex I go to you have three choices for most blockbusters:

Normal

Director's Hall: Digital, wider pleather seats, more leg room, in seat concession service. You pay about $3-4 bucks for these amenities. The reason I choose it is that there are fewer negros acting like idiots during the film due to the surcharge.

IMAX: pretty much the same as Director's with the IMAX curved screen. Is the IMAX experience worth it? I don't see the curved screen offering much. If you are already getting digital what's the advantage?

Thanks.

Size for one thing, the IMAX picture is HUGE, everything is in your INYAFACE!
3-D on IMAX is awesome, you should have seen my little boy when we watched "Creatures of the Deep" at the Smithsonian's IMAX a few months back. This shark is swimming and all ofn the sudden this huge fucking thing comes upp under the shark and gulps it down and come out the screen at you. I even started to grab Liam to sheild him out of instinct.
IMAX is great.

I want to see this movie again. I might drag myself out to the IMAX this time.

IMAX does not have to have a curved screen, and if it your theater has one, be sure to sit in the exact middle of the theater. Otherwise, things are terribly distorted.

A flat IMAX screen is best. IMAX shoots at 500 frames per second, to accommodate the 80 foot high screen. It makes HD look like flip card animation.

Also, there are only 5 minutes per roll of IMAX film, and the sound of the cameras is very loud. Difficult on the actors.

Did I mention that I wrote 3 IMAX films, two of which were nominated for an Academy Award (but didn't win because of all the Serbians). Did I mention that the one that didn't get nominated is the highest grossing IMAX film ever?

seeahill wrote: highest grossing IMAX film ever?

Everest = nice work

seeahill wrote:IMAX does not have to have a curved screen, and if it your theater has one, be sure to sit in the exact middle of the theater. Otherwise, things are terribly distorted.

A flat IMAX screen is best. IMAX shoots at 500 frames per second, to accommodate the 80 foot high screen. It makes HD look like flip card animation.

Also, there are only 5 minutes per roll of IMAX film, and the sound of the cameras is very loud. Difficult on the actors.

Did I mention that I wrote 3 IMAX films, two of which were nominated for an Academy Award (but didn't win because of all the Serbians). Did I mention that the one that didn't get nominated is the highest grossing IMAX film ever?

OK, what does this mean for the typical Hollywood flick they show in IMAX, film, and digital? How are the filming it? What kinda sources are they using in the IMAX theater? I have no idea about any of this shit.

BTW, Tim that is awesome. Congratulations. Do they release IMAX shit on DVD?

Jack wrote:It's 70mm on the IMAX, fucking awesome.

Bale looks funny when he does his batman voice, his jaw goes sideways and he just looks fucking silly. How could a whole fucking town not recognize a guy wearing half a face mask, wtf?

It is good, just way, way too long.

You right on with the BS Batman voice. I guess you have to go with the mask BS.

I think it would have been interesting if they titled the movie after the Joker; considering the performance given by Ledger, the quality of writing for Ledger, Ledger's death, and that the fucking most interesting arc is the Joker's.

Cut down on the chase scenes.