No, just don't go declaring something the winner of an award before you see all the options. How are you to know that there won't be 5 performances even more brilliant than Heath Ledger's?

The bolded part is opinion, the rest of it is attempting to predict the future. Difference.

I can't seem to load page 12. I'm sorry if this is an interrupt, or if my opinion doesn't agree with you folks.

I went to see the film on Friday night, which was PROBABLY a bad idea. I've never EVER seen lines and SOLD OUT signs for one movie like this before. I almost walked out because I couldn't fathom a Batman movie being THAT great.

I wanted to think about the movie for a couple of days before I said anything.

But that movie was NOT that great. The only thing that I found made it watchable was Ledger's role (hate scream yell at me). I don't know much about the mythology of Batman, but I did enjoy Batman Begins. I don't know exactly WHAT persona the Joker is supposed to have except for the things Pang has told me, and of course, my childhood run-in with Jack Nicholson. I tried my very best to erase all of it for Ledger. And he amazed me. I loved, loved, loved the character.

But the movie itself was the same repetitive shit and it dragged on. Again, I'm ignorant when it comes to Batman and the stories that go along with him, but it was pretty... dull except for some very exciting bits.

Was I the only one completely underwhelmed by Eckhart's performance?

I'm sure I'll catch a lot of flack for my opinion on the film, but if I were to watch it again, it would only be for The Joker. The mannerisms had me laughing.

Or have some basic knowledge about the film industry, yeah. Please don't talk unless you know what you're talking about.

Man, what a bunch of elitist pricks.

Also, no, the majority of the SAG awards are voted on by actors, not the Oscars.

EDIT:

Sass, I'm not sure how you were underwhelmed by Eckhart, he did very well given how much he had to work with. Also, the reason it dragged on was some screenplay issues (Dead, now not dead. Oh but SHE'S totally dead. For reals. Could have cut out a step there.) as well as a few issues with the writing getting very over the top from time to time (immovable object speech was rubbish. As was the whole Joker is an agent of chaos and hates plans-but-uses-plans-all-the-time bullshit, not to mention the whole fifteen minute opening was plagued with troubles.) but overall, I'd say the biggest reason you didn't like it was exactly what you said: You're not a Batman fan. It's like going to Field of Dreams with no concept of the Black Sox. It's just not going to be the same experience.

FUUUCK YEAR, Batman. I enjoyed it.

I was however, disappointed by the lack of Audi and Burger King in the movie. Am i rite, Deni?

ur so rong.

Eh, I'm a huge Batman fan. Hell, I know who Ducard was from the comics before they used the name and not the character in Batman Begins - and I was disappointed in this movie.

I didn't say anyone who liked Batman would love this movie. I said it would be hard for someone who didn't like Batman to care and get involved.

Well, tell that to the movie writers who kept shoving expository remarks about HOW CA-RAZY the Joker is.

For people that didn't need to know anything about Batman before walking into the movie, they sure did treat everyone like a fucking idiot.

Wait, you mean those guys at the beginning were working for the joker? The guys in the clown faces worked for a crazy guy called the Joker? Man, I really wish there'd been some audio clues to make it more salient for me that the Joker was the boss of that clown gang. Because man, they sure didn't let me know the JOKER JOKER JOKER JOKER JOKER JOKER etc.

It seems silly to me that you two get hung up on something like that. It's very believable that they would be talking about him using his moniker. That doesn't make me think, "Oh, Nolan is doing this to make sure the crowd knows these guys are working for the Joker." I just think, "OK, these guys were just brought on to do this job by the Joker and they're curious about him and naturally talking to the other guys about him."

Either way, I fail to see how that's an issue big enough to dwell on. If that somehow dampened your enjoyment of the movie, that's unfortunate.

Because I'm an intellectual in my everyday life, I don't like being talked to like an idiot. You may not mind having things explained to you in strained exposition in a pointless scene - but I do because my brain works.

Its not my fault you're stupid - but its because of people like you that the movie pandered the dialouge to such an extent.

I liked the Dark Knight alot, and I actually think it was better than the first movie. This one had so much going on all the time between dark humor and right back to action that I found I was always focused on it and not the packed theater. (people were standing) Not to mention the music was excellent and the strings played up the tension in some spots till it was almost unbearable. S

Not to mention Heath probably is the best joker I've ever seen, it was flawless to the point that I could believe the joker walks the streets today.

Yeah I did notice batmans voice was kind of a goofy hardass thing, but it had been awhile since I saw Batman begins so I realized that was normal.

so, I would definately recommend this to anyone, even if you're not into action films, this movie has something for everyone.

Sure. I mean, I will WATCH the movies, and I will enjoy the movies (usually), but I don't go out of my way to read the comics or the mythology of the characters. I'm sure they're great, but they're not my schtick - I just like some intense action movies.

I went to the movie because I heard all the hype. Yes, I shouldn't have listened, but it's kind of hard when everyone is talking about how FANTASTIC it is, and you want to see what they're talking about.

As a movie, though? Underwhelmed in general. Remove the Batman aspect and what have you got? Just another action movie with some force-fed pseudo-intellectual message.

:lol:

Please refrain from making assumptions about my intelligence. I totally understand where you're coming from when you say you don't want everything explained to you as if you're stupid. I appreciate movies that don't do that, and when they do, it's definitely annoying. I just didn't get any sense of that from their repeated mentions of The Joker. Again, it seems perfectly reasonable that guys in that situation would talk about The Joker by name (and use his name multiple times). I don't think that's necessarily Nolan doing that for the sake of the presumably slow audience.

The Joker was apparently making moves well after the incident in Batman Begins, he's a known presence to the Gotham PD, anyone who watched Batman Begins would be able to associate "Joker Playing Card" with "Joker." It's not "perfectly reasonable" to have a whole bunch of guys basically tip off who their boss is when they're wearing clown masks and blowing each other away. The scene would have had much more impact had they not been going off at the mouth about "SO HE HIRED YOU TOO?"

I took that as legitimate bullshit by the Joker; the point of the speech was to convince Harvey that he should kill people besides the Joker.

Which is why he totally let Harvey put a loaded gun up to his head and left it entirely to chance.

Interesting theory... Joker did like to lie alot. One thing he did, which for some reason Roger Ebert COMPLETELY missed, was that he tells multiple stories in regards to what happened to his face. It wouldn't be out of the realm of impossibility that he was just completely fucking with everybody.

I'm not sure how what I said excludes potentially killing the Joker.

You might have pegged it. It's the whole nemesis setup that drives the film, so if you don't enjoy the back and forth between them, then....well, that doesn't leave a lot. =/

Well, he doesn't really do it for chance. If Harvey had killed him, the end result would have been the same as if he had corrupted Batman. Joker would have brought down the white knight. Joker was fully ready to die earlier if it would mean Batman breaks his One Rule. So it comes back to the word choice and the fact that it's not really chaos but enough direct subversion that it might as well be chaos.

See how you just outlined the plan of a psychopath who apparently doesn't like plans but talks about an immovable object and an unstoppable force?

I haven't seen the film, but

it seems like this "Joker" character might be somehow inconsistent in his motivations or behaviors

am I understanding this right

Crazy is a great motivation for a villain and should always have concrete explanations made to explain the depths of its waters

ROTORBLADE YOU CANNOT PUT CONCRETE IN DEEP WATER

IT WILL SINK

YOUR IDEAS VIOLATE ALL LAWS OF PHYSICK

This is probably the briefest and most intelligent description I've seen of the movie yet.

I'm not sure I agree. We never know the story behind Dennis Hopper in Blue Velvet - but not only is he completely fucking insane and scary as hell - but his performance isn't some crappy insanity pastiche usually reserved for the worst episodes of Law And Order: Special Victims Unit. You know, like the one where that kid played that Dungeons And Dragons videogame and tried to save his dead stepsister?