You do realise that your example sequence was deliberate and not because of the PG13 rating?
He's the Joker. For a moment the audience thinks the nade will explode and the bank manager probably shat his pants 5 times only for it to be sleeping gas. It's a moment of tension.
I don't buy that explanation for a second. To me it felt as if it was intended to blow up initially and after they reviewed which scenes to tone down the grenade was one of the first ones on their list.
For arguments sake tho, lets take another scene where the joker has the knife in Gambles mouth, and they cut away where he presumably kills him (I'm assuming he stabs him in the eye or thru the forehead) I'm not asking for Rorbocop or Friday the 13th part 6 type gore, but a little more suggestion like showing a shot of him on the ground bleeding profusely would really help to legitimize those scenes.
Or the scene after the hospital blows up Nolan makes a point that a cop I think lets the audience know that EVERYONE made it out alive. again: totally LAME. You're telling me not one old granny or gimp got left behind and blown to smitherines!? Oh but no no, we have to think of all the children seeing the movie.
The only scene I think was toned down for a PG-13 rating is when the Joker puts his knife in the guy's mouth and cuts through the guy's cheek "killing" him instantly.
personally, i loved the dark knight. and batman begins. im in no way a comic book fan though. i love the characters from them, but i never read them.
for those of you who think the dark knight was bad... maybe it was good, but then christian bale rewrote the entire script like he did with the terminator (seriously.... look it up. brutal)
but, i would LOVE to see a dark version of the riddler... i honestly think jim carry would play it so well too, as long as he was told to do it dark... not.... well... the other way. lol
for those of you who think the dark knight was bad... maybe it was good, but then christian bale rewrote the entire script like he did with the terminator (seriously.... look it up. brutal)
What?
Terminator was initially to have Connor die at the end and his cybernetic pal was to take on his face. This ending leaked so WB ordered to rewrite the script.
I don't know how true this is, but that's what I think I read on an interview with McG.
I don't buy that explanation for a second. To me it felt as if it was intended to blow up initially and after they reviewed which scenes to tone down the grenade was one of the first ones on their list.
For arguments sake tho, lets take another scene where the joker has the knife in Gambles mouth, and they cut away where he presumably kills him (I'm assuming he stabs him in the eye or thru the forehead) I'm not asking for Rorbocop or Friday the 13th part 6 type gore, but a little more suggestion like showing a shot of him on the ground bleeding profusely would really help to legitimize those scenes.
Or the scene after the hospital blows up Nolan makes a point that a cop I think lets the audience know that EVERYONE made it out alive. again: totally LAME. You're telling me not one old granny or gimp got left behind and blown to smitherines!? Oh but no no, we have to think of all the children seeing the movie.
I want BLOOD AND GORE DAMNIT!!!
I think a lot of people fail to realize that in a movie like this, to get as much revenue as possible, you can't be an R rating. It limits the audience. I thought the movie did a great job of still being pretty brutal in parts without seeming "edited." What was implied was done very well, while still being able to conform to a PG13 rating. There was no need to legitimize those scenes anymore than they were. Less is sometimes more. Take a look at the original TX Chainsaw Massacre...there's no blood in that movie at all, and yet it still manages to be brutal.
I think a lot of people fail to realize that in a movie like this, to get as much revenue as possible, you can't be an R rating. It limits the audience.
haha
i think everyone realizes this, and this is what pisses them off.
i also thought the dark knight was only decent. well worth my money, no arguments there, but the story was definitely bent to fit a few key points i thought they were pushing too hard.
an example of this is the "white knight dent" and "dark knight batman." it's like the whole theme of the movie, but it felt totally unnecessary and unbelievable throughout the whole thing. everyone in the audience likes batman, most of the people in gotham like batman. the movie wants you to believe that most of gotham dislikes batman even though he's a pretty likable vigilante. the writers really wanted to make sure he came through as the "dark knight." however, i think since that wasn't coming through enough, they had to add the ending to make sure gotham had a reason to hate batman (i.e. blaming dent's crimes on him). this whole thing was unnecessary though, because they could have just as easily blamed everything that dent did on the joker. no problem there. the ONLY reason batman took the blame was to perpetuate the concept that "gotham needs dent as the posterboy since batman is so unlikable."
i mean his motivation for keeping the blame off dent makes perfect sense. bruce wayne really values harvey dent because he's basically a poster boy for batman's morals, and he figures he can realistically get more done through politics than batman can on the streets. that is the part of the ending that makes sense within the context of the story. the part that doesn't make sense is taking the blame for himself.
that brings me to the next point. a huge reason why batman needed dent is because he was starting to realize "he couldn't do this forever," so he needed dent to take over. however, at the end of the movie, dent is dead...if you accept my earlier conclusion that batman doesn't have to take the blame, then it doesn't even matter if they left the blame on dent altogether. they act as if it would be traumatic to gotham, because gotham needs a hero, but the only reason batman can't be the hero in the first place is BECAUSE HE TOOK THE BLAME.
so, solution a.) blame the joker. that solves the problem on the most basic superficial level.
solution b.) don't blame anybody. dent did it. gotham just needs a hero, and if batman is credited for taking out joker AND dent and helping with the mob and scarecrow and saving all of gotham in the previous movie...i think he'll do just fine as the hero that gotham "needs."
but as a side comment, i thought the joker was a great character. i hate when they try to give people questionable motivations, and i really just enjoyed a character that had absolutely no agenda at all. his motivation was just having fun and creating chaos. you can't go wrong, and i really enjoyed it.
(however, when alfred is describing the criminal that was stealing and then throwing away the jewels, i don't think that was an appropriate comparison. that guy sounds like he could have just been "stealing from the rich and giving to the poor." alfred can't just assume because he found poor kids playing with a ruby that this guy wasn't playing robin hood). regardless, it was important that alfred said something, because the line that "some people just want to watch the world burn" was a pretty crucial idea for understanding the joker's character
There were signs that the next movie could be worse.
I really didnt like the following things from the dark knight:
- Twoface's ridiculous looking eyeball
- Batmans mobile phone vision
- The batbike that looked like plastic
Maybe Im picky, but those were the things that made the entire movie unreal to me, whereas mostly everything in Batman Begins was believable and made sense. Im just hoping they dont pull any of that shit again, before it turns into the 90's batman movie series.
There were signs that the next movie could be worse.
I really didnt like the following things from the dark knight:
- Twoface's ridiculous looking eyeball
- Batmans mobile phone vision
- The batbike that looked like plastic
Maybe Im picky, but those were the things that made the entire movie unreal to me, whereas mostly everything in Batman Begins was believable and made sense. Im just hoping they dont pull any of that shit again, before it turns into the 90's batman movie series.
I liked the bat bike its like Judge Dredds Lawmaster, which they should have done it like that in the Judge Dredd movie.
I agree with Harvey Dents face, I dont know why they did that, made a blatently fake face in what was up to that point a reasonably realistic plausible story.
Hmm...something tells me you aren't very subjective about this...
I thought his performance was ok. I don't like the route he went with the character though. I liked his performance about as much as Nicholsons...
That's weird until this thread I never thought I would find anyone that didn't worship Ledger's performance, haha.... maybe I'm biased because I'm a huge Batman fan?
Or the scene after the hospital blows up Nolan makes a point that a cop I think lets the audience know that EVERYONE made it out alive.
This is the kind of thing that happens in even the darkest Batman graphic novels too. You dont just kill hordes of random civilians while the hero is away in a superhero story, it neutralizes all of the tension of the hero trying to save innocent people in the inevitable YOU HAVE THIS MUCH TIME BEFORE I KILL EVERYONE faceoff.
Maybe Im picky, but those were the things that made the entire movie unreal to me, whereas mostly everything in Batman Begins was believable and made sense
Boy I could school you on being a Batman fan It's just the younger generation did seem to get a little hysterical over the whole Ledger thing...he was good, but he played it straight. I was expecting some awesome 'realistic' re-interpretation like we got with Scarecrow in Begins. Now THAT was brilliant.
Replies
I dont even remember who rachel is
I don't buy that explanation for a second. To me it felt as if it was intended to blow up initially and after they reviewed which scenes to tone down the grenade was one of the first ones on their list.
For arguments sake tho, lets take another scene where the joker has the knife in Gambles mouth, and they cut away where he presumably kills him (I'm assuming he stabs him in the eye or thru the forehead) I'm not asking for Rorbocop or Friday the 13th part 6 type gore, but a little more suggestion like showing a shot of him on the ground bleeding profusely would really help to legitimize those scenes.
Or the scene after the hospital blows up Nolan makes a point that a cop I think lets the audience know that EVERYONE made it out alive. again: totally LAME. You're telling me not one old granny or gimp got left behind and blown to smitherines!? Oh but no no, we have to think of all the children seeing the movie.
I want BLOOD AND GORE DAMNIT!!!
for those of you who think the dark knight was bad... maybe it was good, but then christian bale rewrote the entire script like he did with the terminator (seriously.... look it up. brutal)
but, i would LOVE to see a dark version of the riddler... i honestly think jim carry would play it so well too, as long as he was told to do it dark... not.... well... the other way. lol
Ive heard so many rumors about possible villians for the third movie
personally my favorite rumor is Philip Seymour Hoffman as the penguin
What?
Terminator was initially to have Connor die at the end and his cybernetic pal was to take on his face. This ending leaked so WB ordered to rewrite the script.
I don't know how true this is, but that's what I think I read on an interview with McG.
I think a lot of people fail to realize that in a movie like this, to get as much revenue as possible, you can't be an R rating. It limits the audience. I thought the movie did a great job of still being pretty brutal in parts without seeming "edited." What was implied was done very well, while still being able to conform to a PG13 rating. There was no need to legitimize those scenes anymore than they were. Less is sometimes more. Take a look at the original TX Chainsaw Massacre...there's no blood in that movie at all, and yet it still manages to be brutal.
haha
i think everyone realizes this, and this is what pisses them off.
this^
Well then they can stop whining about it. It's not like the source material in this case is ultra violent anyways.
an example of this is the "white knight dent" and "dark knight batman." it's like the whole theme of the movie, but it felt totally unnecessary and unbelievable throughout the whole thing. everyone in the audience likes batman, most of the people in gotham like batman. the movie wants you to believe that most of gotham dislikes batman even though he's a pretty likable vigilante. the writers really wanted to make sure he came through as the "dark knight." however, i think since that wasn't coming through enough, they had to add the ending to make sure gotham had a reason to hate batman (i.e. blaming dent's crimes on him). this whole thing was unnecessary though, because they could have just as easily blamed everything that dent did on the joker. no problem there. the ONLY reason batman took the blame was to perpetuate the concept that "gotham needs dent as the posterboy since batman is so unlikable."
i mean his motivation for keeping the blame off dent makes perfect sense. bruce wayne really values harvey dent because he's basically a poster boy for batman's morals, and he figures he can realistically get more done through politics than batman can on the streets. that is the part of the ending that makes sense within the context of the story. the part that doesn't make sense is taking the blame for himself.
that brings me to the next point. a huge reason why batman needed dent is because he was starting to realize "he couldn't do this forever," so he needed dent to take over. however, at the end of the movie, dent is dead...if you accept my earlier conclusion that batman doesn't have to take the blame, then it doesn't even matter if they left the blame on dent altogether. they act as if it would be traumatic to gotham, because gotham needs a hero, but the only reason batman can't be the hero in the first place is BECAUSE HE TOOK THE BLAME.
so, solution a.) blame the joker. that solves the problem on the most basic superficial level.
solution b.) don't blame anybody. dent did it. gotham just needs a hero, and if batman is credited for taking out joker AND dent and helping with the mob and scarecrow and saving all of gotham in the previous movie...i think he'll do just fine as the hero that gotham "needs."
Ok then you basically don't remember anything about the movie lol, so don't pass judgment on it :P
By the way, anyone that didn't appreciate Heath Ledger or his rendition of the Joker wouldn't know a good actor even if God told them, haha...
(however, when alfred is describing the criminal that was stealing and then throwing away the jewels, i don't think that was an appropriate comparison. that guy sounds like he could have just been "stealing from the rich and giving to the poor." alfred can't just assume because he found poor kids playing with a ruby that this guy wasn't playing robin hood). regardless, it was important that alfred said something, because the line that "some people just want to watch the world burn" was a pretty crucial idea for understanding the joker's character
I really didnt like the following things from the dark knight:
- Twoface's ridiculous looking eyeball
- Batmans mobile phone vision
- The batbike that looked like plastic
Maybe Im picky, but those were the things that made the entire movie unreal to me, whereas mostly everything in Batman Begins was believable and made sense. Im just hoping they dont pull any of that shit again, before it turns into the 90's batman movie series.
I liked the bat bike its like Judge Dredds Lawmaster, which they should have done it like that in the Judge Dredd movie.
I agree with Harvey Dents face, I dont know why they did that, made a blatently fake face in what was up to that point a reasonably realistic plausible story.
Hmm...something tells me you aren't very subjective about this...
I thought his performance was ok. I don't like the route he went with the character though. I liked his performance about as much as Nicholsons...
That's weird until this thread I never thought I would find anyone that didn't worship Ledger's performance, haha.... maybe I'm biased because I'm a huge Batman fan?
This is the kind of thing that happens in even the darkest Batman graphic novels too. You dont just kill hordes of random civilians while the hero is away in a superhero story, it neutralizes all of the tension of the hero trying to save innocent people in the inevitable YOU HAVE THIS MUCH TIME BEFORE I KILL EVERYONE faceoff.
Magic ninja martial arts tricks.
Boy I could school you on being a Batman fan