The Dark Knight

[Rileydog]

Dont know what the big deal is-

Lets not forget Batman Begins was 140 mins = 2 hrs and 20 mins

I never felt that movie dragged one bit and the run time and flow was perfect. So what does maybe an extra 10 mins matter.

And, POC:AWE was more like 3 hours and its run time was the least of its problems.

[umainebearman]

Originally Posted by Astrakan

Geez, pessimistic much?

KM

He's just mad cause its not animated.

I think as long as theres good story there and we don't get dragged around for pointless side stories the film will do just fine at 2 1/2 hours.

[Iguana Man]

Originally Posted by Monterey Jack

If the only reason the film is going to be so long is because Nolan is being pressured to not cut a frame of Heath Ledger's performance, then FUCK THAT. You sometimes have to kill your babies in order to make the overall movie experience better.

Don't worry MJ, they ain't cutting any scenes with Ledger. Nolan and WB appear set on dedicating Heath's performance for what it was and should be. At least that's what I've read.

Here's a little reminder as to why 2+ hrs of this film will be bat-goodness for all. I just re-watched it in 1080P (I can't believe it took me this long!).

The Dark Knight

[Monterey Jack]

Originally Posted by umainebearman

He's just mad cause its not animated.

Ha. Ha.

I think as long as theres good story there and we don't get dragged around for pointless side stories the film will do just fine at 2 1/2 hours.

Since the film is cramming in the Joker, Two-Face, Rachel Dawes (WHY did they bring this useless non-character back, especially if they re-cast the role? ) and God knows what else, I'm anticipating another Spider-Man 3 kitchen sink approach. Yeah, the first film was 140 minutes, but that's minus 8 whatever minutes of credits. Honestly, who needs nearly three hours of a Batman flick? Would Raiders Of The Lost Ark have played better at that length? I want to trust Nolan and company, but, sheesh guys, keep that David Lean shit for the inevitable "unrated" DVD cut.

[Iguana Man]

Originally Posted by Monterey Jack

Since the film is cramming in the Joker, Two-Face, Rachel Dawes

Was the Joker crammed in last time? No. Two Face won't be either. It's all about #3.

[MooglePorn]

Monterey's points confuse me... how can having too much to cover be a reason to make it shorter?

We're still not sure yet that Two-Face is even in this movie, as far as I know... just because Dent is does not mean Two-Face is. Even if he is, maybe the movie is longer so that each villain can get proper amounts of screen time.

A movie is not good because it's longer, but it's not bad either... movies should be as long as they should be. I trust Nolan.

[SilentBob]

Two-Face is said to be in the movie but like everyone else has said only as a setup for the 3rd movie. I have no problem at all with the rumoured rutime. The last movie was long but i had no problems with it (even at 2am start time) Nolan has actually been asked to remove a few scenes of the movie with The Joker in it because of the way we see him and to what happened to Heath. The scene in question has tested bad with early preview audience

Spoiler (Highlight or Triple Click to Read):

Joker sitting up and unzipping himself from a body bag. Said to be the scene in the trailer when he says his famous line "Why so serious?"

Nolan said he will not cut it from the movie.

Also i don't understand your problem Monty with too many characters. The first movie again had just as many as this one is said to have. They are giving them a longer length to spread out over and you worry about them being crammed in there?

Forget Spiderman 3 were Raimi was forced to put in Venom for the film. Nolan seems to have more creative control here and you just need to look at his track record to know you can trust him.

[Rileydog]

I think his point was more that cramming too much into the movie is usually a recipe for disaster, or to this point hasnt been done well in other attempts ala Spidey 3.

So, making it shorter would naturally occur if there was less involvment or removal of a character, so as to not duplicate a common behavior in movie making, and particularly superheroes- have success on a film and then have the need to make it bigger and better.

Now, to Nolans credit, I am not afraid of this, and his blending of the different characters in the first movie was excellent. And, he knew which ones needed explaining and which ones you could figure out. He never spent much time other than BM (not bowel movement) talking about the characters which was great- Lucious Fox, Rhas, Scarecrow Crane- you learned exactly what you needed to about each of them so you werent confused. There wasnt the old formula of spending the first half of the movie telling you about them with the 2nd hal fighting them.

I am one who generally agrees with simplifying films- yes they absolutely wasted a prime opportunity to make a Sandman / crime boss kinda story, with a little Harry in there, then an awesome movie with Venom.
Sure they could always bring him back, but not for at least a film or 2.

I think Harvey will be in there, get f-ed up by the Joker to become mangeled or whatever, then end the movie with him mkaing some kinda declaration about who he has become. But not teaming up, or having to fight 2 baddies. And Rachel will probably be in there in certain scenes convenient to the film, not her own or too much screen time.

Guess we'll see before Ironman.

[Keith]

Originally posted by SilentBob
...Nolan has actually been asked to remove a few scenes of the movie with The Joker in it because of the way we see him and to what happened to Heath. The scene in question has tested bad with early preview audience

If that is true I hope Nolan sticks to his guns. Maybe my sensitivity chip is on the fritz, but how could that possibly disturb a casual fan? Save the worry or grief for someone that actually matters to you.

About the run time, I'm OK with it. When the movie works time flies..and like someone said above I trust Nolan. He has yet to make a mediocre film IMO.

[mighty mint]

I am looking forward to the new trailer coming out ...I CAN'T WAIT!!

ooops...just wet myself

[Iguana Man]

Originally Posted by mighty mint

I am looking forward to the new trailer coming out ...I CAN'T WAIT!!

ooops...just wet myself

Is it out already? I was hoping it got leaked but haven't had a chance yet to search. If it has, someone pm me so as not to spoil it for others.



(wait, you always wet yourself. nevermind)

[Iguana Man]

Amazon.com: The Dark Knight Painted Joker Face Men's T-Shirt #2: Apparel

[brian]

Originally Posted by Iguana Man

Amazon.com: The Dark Knight Painted Joker Face Men's T-Shirt #2: Apparel

I think I need to bring my '89 Batman movie shirts out.

[raptors661]

One Sheet:

[mighty mint]

OH MY FREAKIN" GOODNESS! I LOOOOOVE IT!

[Rileydog]

Wow- dont like it at all.

Too agressive in my opinion and not Batman at all. Sounds like some UFC event.

Granted, I undersatnd Joker induces mayhem, and batman may have to go outside the box to beat him, but that tagline just doesnt ring right.

If the phrase gets removed, it may be better, but then again, why is he burning a building and being a bad ass?


Its funny how most times a new poster comes out, there is always a post by some forum member that is so pumped up for it that they sound like they blew a load in their pants.
(granted I am not sure what portion of the people who post on this site are still in high school jacking it in the basement and couldnt control themselves if they wanted, ala Jim with Nadia in American Pie)

[mighty mint]

Nice post Riley. I appreciate your extremely deep insight into the poster and the movie plot itself. Your analogy of someone creaming themselves was also quite helpful AND humorous (though I am still not sure that you yourself are past the warm apple pie stage.) Would the poster be better for you if it showed some boobies?

I LOVE the poster as Rileydog pointed out so subtly...This is a recreation of Batman and speaks to Dark Knight side which has been largely ignored in the movies up until this point. Yes, Batman is a badass.

1) Why would anything think he started that fire?
2) Why can't it just be part of the poster for advertising?
3) In the trailer Gordon is seen smashing the Bat light perhaps this is the way that Joker calls Bats to a duel since the light is down?

Further, the tagline fits perfectly with the character of Joker and the trailer clips released so far. It certainly aligns with the very first teaser clip where we hear Alfred talking to Bruce about the crazies in the world who would like nothing less than to see it burn just for fun.

Of course, the are all my HUMBLE opinions from one who is "giddy like a school girl" and apparently has no more load left.

[Brikar99]

It's just a cool freakin' image. That's all I care about.

[Rileydog]

well, i guess thats one way to look at it, but it assumes alot of the plot detail.

until we see the movie we cant confirm that correlation, which in my opinion then sends the wrong message- he is going to go on the violent tip, or take whatever means necessary.

i always took him as a more cerebral and calculated person, who aside from feelings of wanting to be more of a vigilante, in the end always used restraint.


I also would prefer more imagery and less full character shots.

[Iguana Man]

I'm not that fond of this one sheet. I see the burning Bat signal created by explosions with Bats looking away as a way for them to portray Gotham is burning by the hands of a lunatic. Obviously that loon is The Joker, not Bats.

Seems to me it's too lit up. The whole image. That's why I don't care for it. It should evoke the night, not dusk or dawn as this one sheet does.

As far as the last part of Riley's post...hehe...here I thought I was bad but your summation may have tried too hard to be funny (wasn't) and that kind of crap should be left to me since no one take me seriously!

[Pirate]

You guys know that I’m a one-sheet whore, but, I’m sorry—that poster sucks. Given the fantastic advances, this one just doesn’t cut it. Perhaps if they had removed the out-of-place Batman at the bottom it would’ve worked. It looks more like a commercial sheet they sell in Wal-Mart than an actual final one-sheet.

[umainebearman]

Yeah Batman seems out of place in that poster and gives the impression that he started that fire which I'm willing to bet money he didn't. I think it would have been a better poster had the Joker been at the bottom facing the builing arms in the air as if screaming "BURN!"

[Monrozombi]

Got this from work earlier this week, per genious and kinda creepy

[mighty mint]

Originally Posted by umainebearman

Yeah Batman seems out of place in that poster and gives the impression that he started that fire which I'm willing to bet money he didn't. I think it would have been a better poster had the Joker been at the bottom facing the builing arms in the air as if screaming "BURN!"

Yeah, I can see how the poster can present mixed views and YES I would have preferred Bats not being there...it would have made WAY more sense to have the Joker standing there as if he was waiting. JMHO

Iggy, have YOU moved on from warm apple pies?

[raptors661]

Originally Posted by Monrozombi

Got this from work earlier this week, per genious and kinda creepy

Both cool and creepy!

[Iguana Man]

Originally Posted by mighty mint

Iggy, have YOU moved on from warm apple pies?

It was never apple pies for me. Never. Pecan yes, apple, no.