I really hope it does. This film is much more worthy of that record (in my opinionJosh wrote:Even if The Dark Knight doesn't reach Titanic's record, I'm still glad that it is doing very well.
)Batman Begins
-
Whippet Angel
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 608
- Joined: January 22nd, 2007
)Thanks Josh.Josh wrote:(By the way, cool article! Even if The Dark Knight doesn't reach Titanic's record, I'm still glad that it is doing very well. Earlier this summer, I assumed Knight would make close to what Batman Begins made.)
Yeah, I'm also glad it's doing well. As far-fetched as this MAY sound, I think there might possibly be a chance of a Best Picture nom later this year--really, I do. If the Sixth Sense can do it, TDK certainly can! 
)I agree Angel!Whippet Angel wrote:I really hope it does. This film is much more worthy of that record (in my opinion
You can’t just have your characters announce how they feel! That makes me feel angry!
Here is a positive update on Morgan Freeman: http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=47631
Looks like he is going to be fine, thank goodness.
Looks like he is going to be fine, thank goodness.
-
eddievalient
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 1347
- Joined: January 23rd, 2006
- Location: The Middle of Nowhere
I'm afraid I gotta come clean...
While I thought it was a much, <I>much</I> better film than Batman Begins, that wasn't saying much for me.
I just didn't like the <I>Dark Knight</I> all that much and can't see how it's making all this coinage. I found it to be a series of non-linking scenes that didn't really build to anything (within a scene) and cut to something else just as things were getting interesting.
Case in point: the party that the Joker crashes: Bats arrives, things start getting juicy and he has to leap out to save the girl, we think there's an action sequence about to begin, but no: they just land and...that's it!? Are we to believe the Joker then carried on partying upstairs with the other guests? Batman just went home? That was a real "<I>what?</I>" moment for me.
The rest of the film followed suit: again things just happen and drop into place all too conveniently. I didn't think Ledger actually had much chance to assert his Joker character - the impact he <I>did</I> make was down to him being a superlative performer, but his character was hardly in the movie. I thought the best thing was the treatment of Two-Face, which was handled pretty well.
I found the use of Chicago to be <I>much</I> better utilised in the film: no fake, jarring CG monorail shots: just a tough, hard city at work and play. There were good things: the gritty opening had nice touches, but I was hoping the vigilante Batmans would be back, possibly even killed in mistake for being the real deal.
I found the music to be the same old thing as before. Quick, we must have action, and so Zimmer's pounding strings - the same four notes - just kept plugging away in the background while the horns built some kind of tension that the picture wasn't accomplishing elsewhere.
I just thought that each scene was a snapshot of something much better: I'm sure there's a three and a half hour director's cut in here that could be mega-fantastic, but I didn't see that one last week in the theater.
I didn't think it was "bad", but just not very good. Sorry!
While I thought it was a much, <I>much</I> better film than Batman Begins, that wasn't saying much for me.
I just didn't like the <I>Dark Knight</I> all that much and can't see how it's making all this coinage. I found it to be a series of non-linking scenes that didn't really build to anything (within a scene) and cut to something else just as things were getting interesting.
Case in point: the party that the Joker crashes: Bats arrives, things start getting juicy and he has to leap out to save the girl, we think there's an action sequence about to begin, but no: they just land and...that's it!? Are we to believe the Joker then carried on partying upstairs with the other guests? Batman just went home? That was a real "<I>what?</I>" moment for me.
The rest of the film followed suit: again things just happen and drop into place all too conveniently. I didn't think Ledger actually had much chance to assert his Joker character - the impact he <I>did</I> make was down to him being a superlative performer, but his character was hardly in the movie. I thought the best thing was the treatment of Two-Face, which was handled pretty well.
I found the use of Chicago to be <I>much</I> better utilised in the film: no fake, jarring CG monorail shots: just a tough, hard city at work and play. There were good things: the gritty opening had nice touches, but I was hoping the vigilante Batmans would be back, possibly even killed in mistake for being the real deal.
I found the music to be the same old thing as before. Quick, we must have action, and so Zimmer's pounding strings - the same four notes - just kept plugging away in the background while the horns built some kind of tension that the picture wasn't accomplishing elsewhere.
I just thought that each scene was a snapshot of something much better: I'm sure there's a three and a half hour director's cut in here that could be mega-fantastic, but I didn't see that one last week in the theater.
I didn't think it was "bad", but just not very good. Sorry!
-
eddievalient
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 1347
- Joined: January 23rd, 2006
- Location: The Middle of Nowhere