The Dark Knight Movie Discussion (July 18th, 2008) — Page 5

GhostAlpha26 said:

Who said he had to break all his bones, have him show some sort of discomfort after falling that far

I guess laying there and not moving just wasn't enough then.  I guess he had to say something like "Groan, that hurt."  Yeah, that would've made that scene so much better :P

Ok well Ill get the ones we’ve discussed out of the way first

The SWAT member riding shotgun making terrible comments throughout that entire chase scene

Shock...horror!  A no name actor gets the worst lines in the movie!  I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!

Fox having a problem helping Batman locate Joker, using the technology he created and when his morals have been at best questionable with what else he has done for Batman.

Uh, no.  Fox had a dilema because Batman suddenly wants to invade EVERYONES privacy in order to find one criminal.  This is probably the one scene in the entire movie that could be compared to our current government (not getting into it here).  I don't think anything else he had done until that point had been questionable at all.  Everything he did to that point involved helping someone that actually had the money and abilities to catch the bad buys, to actually catch the bad guys.

A yellow school bus driving out of a bank covered in rubble and everyone acting like that was a normal thing.

I thought it was funny actually.  I'm sure everyone did freak out (the shot wasn't exactly a close up) and I can imagine the calls to 911.  "A school bus just drove out of a bank".  So the cops would end up looking for a school bus and they'd find all those buses driving somewhere (maybe).  And that then assumes that Joker didn't simply drive it a couple of blocks and then unload it.

The whole scene recreating the fingerprint from a fragmented bullet was completely and absolutely absurd.

Much like almost every episode of CSI, right?

Making the convict out to be a “good” person by having him throw out the remote. I guess their trying to show not everyone is as messed up as the Joker, sorry the guys already in an orange jumpsuit…failure.

Or maybe they were trying to point out that the convict realized "I've had my chance.  I screwed up.  I need to pay my debt."  Just because you're in an orange jumpsuit, doesn't mean you have to be evil and take out a bunch of innocent people.  It seemed to me like he was willing to serve his time or even accept the fate of being blown up rather than take out everyone else.  In fact, a friend of mine said it would have been really fun if both detonators actually blew up the convicts anyway.  I think it would've been funny if the detonators had blown up the boats they were on.  I think that would've been classic Joker.

Batman not being Batman. Not attempting to stop Rachel and himself from falling. Not attempting to get the drop on The Joker in the building when he knew his exact location. Batman walking straight up to Two-Face when he had a gun to the kids head. Batman just walks around in broad daylight, so much for his secretive nature.Batman basically getting his butt kicked by The Joker and only accidently beating him.

Yeah, because Joker had been so easily surprised before.  And he didn't exactly "walk up to Two-Face".  If I remember correctly, he lept at him and it actually was a surprise.

Batman saving The Joker.

As others have said, this was perfectly within character.  If he had really wanted to kill him, he would've run him over with his motorcycle.

The Joker making a deal with the mob to get their money when he cares about nothing.

Others have already pointed this one out.  Joker only cared about chaos.  By burning his half, he made the mob realize how insane he really was.

Batmans longest and most physical fight was with the SWAT team.  He couldnt have incapacitated the first group, grabbed one of their comms and informed the entire team? Nah it was better for him to have fought all of them, that made more sense. I mean don’t have him fight the criminals/enemy for the last big fight scene.

Um, no, because they were no longer listening to him if you remember.  They were taking orders from Gordon only.  What would've made some sense, if Gordon had been willing to listen to Batman, would be if Batman had radioed Gordon and told him to have the SWAT team stand down because the "criminals" were just a bunch of kids all tied up.  But then that would've taken the dramatic element out of it and it would've meant that Gordon still trusted Batman when it was becoming apparent that he didn't.

The Jokers convincing of Harvey into becoming a cold blooded murder.

Yeah, I'm sure it was hard for Joker to do after Batman saved him instead of Rachel.

The Joker blowing up the hospital. (I have my reasons for that, I don’t wish to explain)

Um, ok.

Putting The Mayor out in an area impossible to control and extremely visible after a hits been placed on his life.

Maybe to draw the bad guy out?  I don't really know nor do I care.  It didn't really jump out at me as a bad thing.

Tiptup said:

lol, you condemn a benign personal statement, falsely and directly accuse someone of absolutely "assuming things" and having poor "character," and yet, in the process, you're turning right around and doing all of those same things yourself. That's what you call being logical?

His perception of you as someone who isn't giving the movie a chance is a valid perception to mention in the context of this discussion. You're both talking about the flaws you mentioned and Ash doesn't think they were bad enough to actually ruin the movie as much as you think it does. He never claimed that his perception of you was the actual truth and he wasn't saying that in a way to attack you. He's simply trying to understand why you have such a strong opinion of it all (particularly in light of the fact that he defended his thoughts logically before that point). Your personal statements, on the other hand, are clearly hostile and designed to demean others (by comparison). Grow up.

(Yes I just said you're immature. Cry about it if you want.) :)

Thank you all knowing Internet masterbater I mean debater. Thank you for putting me in my place youve done a great justice to the Internet, you can sleep well knowing thats the most constructive thing youve probably accomplished in a while. I have seen the light from someone who has mastered himself on the net. Forget Baracak we have a new Messiah and it is TipTup. You have shown how I have effectively tarnished my image on an Internet forum, whoa is me.

GhostAlpha26 said: but those are my reasons but Im sure youll have all kinds of circumventing you can come up with to “disprove” my reasons, but it would be mute, their what I felt made the movie poor.

lordjedi said

I guess laying there and not moving just wasn't enough then.  I guess he had to say something like "Groan, that hurt."  Yeah, that would've made that scene so much better :P

Ok well Ill get the ones we’ve discussed out of the way first

The SWAT member riding shotgun making terrible comments throughout that entire chase scene

Shock...horror!  A no name actor gets the worst lines in the movie!  I'm shocked, shocked I tell you!

Fox having a problem helping Batman locate Joker, using the technology he created and when his morals have been at best questionable with what else he has done for Batman.

Uh, no.  Fox had a dilema because Batman suddenly wants to invade EVERYONES privacy in order to find one criminal.  This is probably the one scene in the entire movie that could be compared to our current government (not getting into it here).  I don't think anything else he had done until that point had been questionable at all.  Everything he did to that point involved helping someone that actually had the money and abilities to catch the bad buys, to actually catch the bad guys.

A yellow school bus driving out of a bank covered in rubble and everyone acting like that was a normal thing.

I thought it was funny actually.  I'm sure everyone did freak out (the shot wasn't exactly a close up) and I can imagine the calls to 911.  "A school bus just drove out of a bank".  So the cops would end up looking for a school bus and they'd find all those buses driving somewhere (maybe).  And that then assumes that Joker didn't simply drive it a couple of blocks and then unload it.

The whole scene recreating the fingerprint from a fragmented bullet was completely and absolutely absurd.

Much like almost every episode of CSI, right?

Making the convict out to be a “good” person by having him throw out the remote. I guess their trying to show not everyone is as messed up as the Joker, sorry the guys already in an orange jumpsuit…failure.

Or maybe they were trying to point out that the convict realized "I've had my chance.  I screwed up.  I need to pay my debt."  Just because you're in an orange jumpsuit, doesn't mean you have to be evil and take out a bunch of innocent people.  It seemed to me like he was willing to serve his time or even accept the fate of being blown up rather than take out everyone else.  In fact, a friend of mine said it would have been really fun if both detonators actually blew up the convicts anyway.  I think it would've been funny if the detonators had blown up the boats they were on.  I think that would've been classic Joker.

Batman not being Batman. Not attempting to stop Rachel and himself from falling. Not attempting to get the drop on The Joker in the building when he knew his exact location. Batman walking straight up to Two-Face when he had a gun to the kids head. Batman just walks around in broad daylight, so much for his secretive nature.Batman basically getting his butt kicked by The Joker and only accidently beating him.

Yeah, because Joker had been so easily surprised before.  And he didn't exactly "walk up to Two-Face".  If I remember correctly, he lept at him and it actually was a surprise.

Batman saving The Joker.

As others have said, this was perfectly within character.  If he had really wanted to kill him, he would've run him over with his motorcycle.

The Joker making a deal with the mob to get their money when he cares about nothing.

Others have already pointed this one out.  Joker only cared about chaos.  By burning his half, he made the mob realize how insane he really was.

Batmans longest and most physical fight was with the SWAT team.  He couldnt have incapacitated the first group, grabbed one of their comms and informed the entire team? Nah it was better for him to have fought all of them, that made more sense. I mean don’t have him fight the criminals/enemy for the last big fight scene.

Um, no, because they were no longer listening to him if you remember.  They were taking orders from Gordon only.  What would've made some sense, if Gordon had been willing to listen to Batman, would be if Batman had radioed Gordon and told him to have the SWAT team stand down because the "criminals" were just a bunch of kids all tied up.  But then that would've taken the dramatic element out of it and it would've meant that Gordon still trusted Batman when it was becoming apparent that he didn't.

The Jokers convincing of Harvey into becoming a cold blooded murder.

Yeah, I'm sure it was hard for Joker to do after Batman saved him instead of Rachel.

The Joker blowing up the hospital. (I have my reasons for that, I don’t wish to explain)

Um, ok.

Putting The Mayor out in an area impossible to control and extremely visible after a hits been placed on his life.

Maybe to draw the bad guy out?  I don't really know nor do I care.  It didn't really jump out at me as a bad thing.

 

GhostAlpha26 said: but those are my reasons but Im sure youll have all kinds of circumventing you can come up with to “disprove” my reasons, but it would be mute, their what I felt made the movie poor.

Just in case you missed it at the top, because you apparently did from the original post.

And Im very proud of ya, you did just what I figured you would do.

lordjedi said: And he didn't exactly "walk up to Two-Face".  If I remember correctly, he lept at him and it actually was a surprise

Did you even see this movie? He walks right up to him and starts conversing with him. Only after revealing that he was there and getting shot does he leap at him. Selective memory much?

As i have already said batman killing the Joker is withing his character because Bob Kane allowed that on the 1989 film.

Christopher Nolan did not create Batman, Bob Kane did.

I think his the true author of batman can say what and what is not batman too bad he is dead.

The only film the author approved was the first batman film starring Michael Keaton and directed by Tim Burton.

As i have already mentioned the new batman films fit more in the Frank Miller batman universe than they do Kane's.

Anything not worked on by Bob Kane is EU. In the Same way all star wars stories not by Lucas are.

Same with the Bond Films and Star Trek. They can add the created by and trademark all they want it does not validate it as the original authors intent or an extention of their work.

as i posted earlier and nobody responded to:

GhostAlpha26 said:

Just in case you missed it at the top, because you apparently did from the original post.

And Im very proud of ya, you did just what I figured you would do.

 

Well, I guess you know me so well then, don't ya.  Here's a cookie.

 

lordjedi said: And he didn't exactly "walk up to Two-Face".  If I remember correctly, he lept at him and it actually was a surprise

 

Did you even see this movie? He walks right up to him and starts conversing with him. Only after revealing that he was there and getting shot does he leap at him. Selective memory much?

 

No, it's called only seeing the movie one time and not being that worried about some little details.

I saw what you said about "These are my opinions of the movie".  I was just pointing out some alternate explanations that I had come up with while watching the movie.  Have we gotten to the point, again, where we need every little thing explained (bus coming out of bank, convict throwing away detonator, etc, etc)?

lordjedi said:

Well, I guess you know me so well then, don't ya.  Here's a cookie

I was thinking more along the lines of, Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity, but its obvious we see things differently :p

lordjedi said:

Have we gotten to the point, again, where we need every little thing explained (bus coming out of bank, convict throwing away detonator, etc, etc)?

lordjedi said:

What other holes does it have?

No, I answered your question. Its often how things work.

I re-quoted myself showing you that I was not interested in your explanations to my reasons of why I did not like the movie after watching it twice. Especially seeing as the person providing the alternate explanations has shown on more than one occasion  he doesnt quite remember how all the scenes played out :)

GhostAlpha26 said:

 

lordjedi said:

Well, I guess you know me so well then, don't ya.  Here's a cookie

I was thinking more along the lines of, Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity, but its obvious we see things differently :p

lordjedi said:

Have we gotten to the point, again, where we need every little thing explained (bus coming out of bank, convict throwing away detonator, etc, etc)?

 

lordjedi said:

What other holes does it have?

No, I answered your question. Its often how things work.

 

I re-quoted myself showing you that I was not interested in your explanations to my reasons of why I did not like the movie after watching it twice. Especially seeing as the person providing the alternate explanations has shown on more than one occasion  he doesnt quite remember how all the scenes played out :)

Wow.  So you resort to name calling now?  Thanks for proving how much of an asshole you really are.

Yes, we see things differently.  I enjoy a good movie, even if it does have a few holes in it.  Apparently I enjoy a good movie more than about 90% of the population here.  It seems like most of you guys love nothing better than to tear the latest blockbuster apart when it doesn't match your vision of how the movie should have been.

Who gives a flying fuck how all the scenes played out?  Seriously.  Oh noes, I don't remember how a few scenes play out!  Guess what, it makes my opinion just as valid as yours, which is to say not very much anyway.  I technically was only mistaken on one scene since, after rewatching the fall scene 5 times, his cape does flare up and make sound, just like I said the first time.  I don't really care if it fits your vision of what's required to survive a fall like that.

I've said before that I don't care if something doesn't make sense.  I still liked the movie.  You have your opinion and I have mine.  Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and they all stink.  The difference is, I'm at least willing to hear alternative explanations for some of the scenes represented.  You don't seem to give a shit either way.  As far as you're concerned, the scenes were stupid and that's all there is to it.  I have often wondered why you even bothered to explain the problems you had with the movie with an attitude like that.  Most people would at least be willing to hear an alternative.

lordjedi said:

GhostAlpha26 said:

 

lordjedi said:

Well, I guess you know me so well then, don't ya.  Here's a cookie

I was thinking more along the lines of, Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity, but its obvious we see things differently :p

lordjedi said:

Have we gotten to the point, again, where we need every little thing explained (bus coming out of bank, convict throwing away detonator, etc, etc)?

 

lordjedi said:

What other holes does it have?

No, I answered your question. Its often how things work.

 

I re-quoted myself showing you that I was not interested in your explanations to my reasons of why I did not like the movie after watching it twice. Especially seeing as the person providing the alternate explanations has shown on more than one occasion  he doesnt quite remember how all the scenes played out :)

 

Wow.  So you resort to name calling now?  Thanks for proving how much of an asshole you really are.

Yes, we see things differently.  I enjoy a good movie, even if it does have a few holes in it.  Apparently I enjoy a good movie more than about 90% of the population here.  It seems like most of you guys love nothing better than to tear the latest blockbuster apart when it doesn't match your vision of how the movie should have been.

Who gives a flying fuck how all the scenes played out?  Seriously.  Oh noes, I don't remember how a few scenes play out!  Guess what, it makes my opinion just as valid as yours, which is to say not very much anyway.  I technically was only mistaken on one scene since, after rewatching the fall scene 5 times, his cape does flare up and make sound, just like I said the first time.  I don't really care if it fits your vision of what's required to survive a fall like that.

I've said before that I don't care if something doesn't make sense.  I still liked the movie.  You have your opinion and I have mine.  Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and they all stink.  The difference is, I'm at least willing to hear alternative explanations for some of the scenes represented.  You don't seem to give a shit either way.  As far as you're concerned, the scenes were stupid and that's all there is to it.  I have often wondered why you even bothered to explain the problems you had with the movie with an attitude like that.  Most people would at least be willing to hear an alternative.

HAHAHAHAHA. That was awesome. I have heard the alternatives from reviewers and fanboys (such as yourself) world wide. Maybe you are right about how truly amazing this film is its making ordinary internet users go crazy, The Joker has won. This movie is profound.

lordjedi said:

I have often wondered why you even bothered to explain the problems you had with the movie with an attitude like that.

lordjedi said:

What other holes does it have?

GhostAlpha26 said:

 

HAHAHAHAHA. That was awesome. I have heard the alternatives from reviewers and fanboys (such as yourself) world wide. Maybe you are right about how truly amazing this film is its making ordinary internet users go crazy, The Joker has won. This movie is profound.

 

 

I'm not a fanboy (at least I wouldn't call myself one).  I only know Batman from the movies and the old TV show with Adam West.  I don't know the comics or most of the mythos.  I definitely don't know enough of it to know all the characters, especially by their real names (I had no idea Harvey Dent in Batman was suppose to be Two-Face, which is why I didn't know why it was a problem for B.D. Williams to be playing him until I talked to friends that have read the comics).  I wouldn't say the movie is "profound", but I think as a sequel to what was essentially a franchise "reboot" it was a very good movie.

GhostAlpha26 said:

 

Thank you all knowing Internet masterbater I mean debater. Thank you for putting me in my place youve done a great justice to the Internet, you can sleep well knowing thats the most constructive thing youve probably accomplished in a while. I have seen the light from someone who has mastered himself on the net. Forget Baracak we have a new Messiah and it is TipTup. You have shown how I have effectively tarnished my image on an Internet forum, whoa is me.

Tarnish yourself? I'm concerned about what was being said, not you. As far as personal things go, I'll be the first to admit that I can be an asshole as well and I don't really care.

I was simply reading the discussion and didn't like the way you preached about logic when you were twisting it terribly. The misuse of logic is one of my pet peeves (I can be very anal about it as I'm sure you remember). You were assuming things about Ash that went way beyond anything he assumed about you. Otherwise, before that point, I thought your impressions of the actual movie were easily worth reading.

ChainsawAsh said:

GhostAlpha -

You didn't like it.  We get it.  Fine.  Now do you really need to prove that you're right, or that your opinions are better than ours?  If you didn't like the movie that's fine, it wasn't your cup of tea, but do we all really need to get into these bullshit heated arguments over it because you're too bullheaded to give anyone else's opinion the time of day?

You did like it we get that too but you continue to defend the movie. Its ok to defend it within this thread but not ok to "put it down." Pot calling the kettle black?

So I havent made every post all about the movie but, least we forget who took the discussion out of context of movie discussion and to personal motives of disliking it :) Again Pot calling the Kettle black.

Tiptup said:

Tarnish yourself? I'm concerned about what was being said, not you. As far as personal things go, I'll be the first to admit that I can be an asshole as well and I don't really care.

I was simply reading the discussion and didn't like the way you preached about logic when you were twisting it terribly. The misuse of logic is one of my pet peeves (I can be very anal about it as I'm sure you remember). You were assuming things about Ash that went way beyond anything he assumed about you. Otherwise, before that point, I thought your impressions of the actual movie were easily worth reading.

Oh I understood perfectly that a statement was made about myself instead about the movie, and previous to that point I was having a discussion purely based off the movie, afterwards I could care less if I was making personal statements and acting illogical.

Because *Cue the dramatic music* just as you can not sit idling by kind citizen while logic is being twisted on the internet, I can not have an ill-favroed statement be directed towards me that is meanlingless and do nothing. A call to action is requried and that action is to act irrationally and defend the injustice even if it causes more injustice :p

Hahaha, so much fun

GhostAlpha26 said:

I can not have an ill-favroed statement be directed towards me that is meanlingless and do nothing.

Correction: You were unable to have what you incorrectly understood to be an "ill-favored" statement and should apologize for having assumed too much (in light of how seriously you take the offense of personal assumptions). There was nothing in what Ash said that required any interpretation of ill-favor.

Tiptup said:

GhostAlpha26 said:

I can not have an ill-favroed statement be directed towards me that is meaningless and do nothing.

Correction: You were unable to have what you incorrectly understood to be an "ill-favored" statement and should apologize for having assumed too much (in light of how seriously you take the offense of personal assumptions). There was nothing in what Ash said that required any interpretation of ill-favor.

On the contrary, you can get stabbed for being a called a "nit picker" from where I come from:p It has such negative connotation and implies so much about a person. 

Sweet the ignore feature works.

Whoa! Really sad what the TDK thread has devolved into.

Maybe we can get back on topic now, though I suppose the movie has been out long enough that it is old news now.

I FINALLY got to see TDK yesterday. Been dying to see it since release, but things kept coming up, then all my friends had seen it without me and I was having a hard time getting any of them to go see it a second time with me.

I loved it. I am a very harsh critic of movies, and I usual manage to find something in modern movies that totally pulls me out of the movie and ruins the whole thing for me. The whole time watching TDK it was near perfect, little tiny things here and there, but nothing that ruined the film. I was impressed. Until toward the very end and Dent's face gets burnt off, I was expecting that of course, and all the story points worked fine for me. The only thing I didn't like about it was the look of the burnt face. Looked too zombish and unreal. I am surprised nobody else mentioned this before. His lidless eye would have dried out, even if it had somehow managed not to be burnt up with the rest of his face. Also I am pretty sure it would be hard to articulate words as perfectly as Dent does with only half a pair a lips. I was expecting them to go for something much more realistic looking. Just came off as really cartoony to me and not grotesque as I suppose the intention was.

So, that was the thing that managed to pull me out of the movie, but I am determined not to let it ruin the movie for me.

As for the convict throwing the detonator out the window, I thought that worked perfectly. From the moment the detonator showed up and was explained I thought that if I was the prison guard I would have thrown the thing out the window, or at least locked it away in another room rather than keep it there in the open in from of a mass quantity of hardened criminals. I can totaly relate to the convict, being a hardend killer himself and probably having spent a good deal of time in prison to reflect on how his life had gone wrong, looking at the prison guard holding the detonator and thinking what an asshole he was for even considering the possibility of blowing the other boat up. I thought that scene was very well done. Surprised it got complained about.

GhostAlpha26 said:

Tiptup said:

GhostAlpha26 said:

I can not have an ill-favroed statement be directed towards me that is meaningless and do nothing.

Correction: You were unable to have what you incorrectly understood to be an "ill-favored" statement and should apologize for having assumed too much (in light of how seriously you take the offense of personal assumptions). There was nothing in what Ash said that required any interpretation of ill-favor.

 

On the contrary, you can get stabbed for being a called a "nit picker" from where I come from:p It has such negative connotation and implies so much about a person.

 

Sweet the ignore feature works.

Me being a nitpicker is not logically "contrary" to anything I've said, but thanks for trying again.

Oh well, whether you're ignoring this or not, you're a crybaby. Being an asshole won't solve that for you. :P

HotRod said:

I did like the wrapping up of the Scarecrow story tho. Surprised the actor playing him (sorry, forgot his name) agreed to such a small cameo.

Could have been cut in the editing room.  Might be a deleted/extended scene on the DVD.

Tiptup said:

GhostAlpha26 said:

Tiptup said:

GhostAlpha26 said:

I can not have an ill-favroed statement be directed towards me that is meaningless and do nothing.

Correction: You were unable to have what you incorrectly understood to be an "ill-favored" statement and should apologize for having assumed too much (in light of how seriously you take the offense of personal assumptions). There was nothing in what Ash said that required any interpretation of ill-favor.

 

On the contrary, you can get stabbed for being a called a "nit picker" from where I come from:p It has such negative connotation and implies so much about a person.

 

Sweet the ignore feature works.

Me being a nitpicker is not logically "contrary" to anything I've said, but thanks for trying again.

Oh well, whether you're ignoring this or not, you're a crybaby. Being an asshole won't solve that for you. :P

Hahaha your such a tool. No one called you a nit picker, Jesus your thick LoL. If you couldnt tell I have not cared nor taken this "argument," seriously at all with you. Hahaha its hilarious to watch you continue on. Watching you give a legitimate attempt at making "logical" arguments against statements that I make that are purposely outlandish, its very entertaining. The fact that your making arguments against statements that are not intended at all to have any substance shows how easy it is to tweak you. What a tool hahahaha

And you werent ignored your way to fun and easy to mess with :p