I think that might be explained a bit in Batman Begins, in a roundabout way. I’ll just cut & paste from my post in the discussion thread:
If this was an intentional allusion, then Batman would be a little more than just “Bruce in a Batsuit.”
For my money, Zooey Deschanel is an actress who plays “slightly unhinged” very well. If you’ve seen Showtime’s Weeds, you know what I mean.
I like Zooey Deschanel (and her Emily on “Bones”), but I don’t think she has that slinky quality that Catwoman needs. I can see her breaking into some sprawling mansion to steal something and then tripping over the couch.
I don’t watch Bones, but I suggest you may be confusing the actress with a character she plays. She can be quite slinky.
In what movie? Everything I’ve ever seen of her has her playing a very quirky, slightly clumsy nerd’s wet dream.
I agree with this, but I think Deschanel would be a much better Harley Quinn than Catwoman.
Although, to be fair, I once suggested her as The Mist’s daughter if they ever made a Starman movie,
Actually, you seem to be conflating “quirky” with “clumsy.” Can you give examples of Zooey’s “clumsiness?”
I think she was “quirky” but also slinky on Weeds.
Angelina Jollie might not be a good choice, IMO, for Catwoman.
AJ’s been too much of a prominent feature of the tabloids, and celebrity chasers. I fear that, unless she has the acting skills to submerge herself enough so that when you look at her, you see Catwoman and not AJ, she would be too much of a distraction in the film.
“Lara Croft v. Batman”. Heh.
Interesting analysis, yet still a rather far-reaching one, methinks. That Bruce can just flip in and out of the character as needed, yet still be at the whims of the drug he took years before? Can’t quite buy that. Plus I eould think they would have mentioned that in the film. Again though, interesting.
Perhaps you didn’t notice, but Nolen was trying to make Batman realistic (well, as realistic as one can expect in a superhero film. Superman Batman is not.
I was wondering about that. I kept thinking, “Either that man loves the eye make up or I have to steal his eyes”–man’s lashes are thicker than mine even when after two pounds of mascara!
Ok, first of all its clear that the Nolan bros. read an astonishing amount of Batman material in preparation for this movie. Some bits are obvious, some I may be imagining;
*Gordon faking his death… I seem to recall Harvey Dent faking his death in Long Halloween.
- The Copybats (excellant name for them) are directly inspired by the Sons of the Batman from Dark Knight Returns.
- This is a stretch, but Batman turning all cellphones into a giant spying device, an act which alienates him from his friends, rang of the whole “Brother Eye” satellite arc from Justice League comics a few years ago.
- The Big Pile of Burning Money in the warehouse… a scene straight from the Long Halloween.
- The Joker trying to experiment with what drives people insane, what makes them killers, as shown with the ferry-bomb experiments reminded me very much of how he tried to turn JIm Gordon insane in The Killing Joke
- Lucius relaying things to Batman struck me as very Oracle-ey.
*Batman in Hong Kong… wasn;t there an TPB about this? haven’t read it though.
*Also, the whole Batman as fugitive thing atth end, there’s also a TPB entitled Bruce Wayne; Fugitive, again I havent read it, so cant say its influences. Regardless, batman is a fugitive in the Dark Knight Returns.
Other than that;
*The Bat-sonar world… Anyone see the Daredevil movie?
*Batman diving out the window and catching Rachel Dawes struck me as a bit like what you might see in a Spider-man movie.
And the one thing I will say about the Joker… His absolute lack of a plan, or “grand scheme” was this movies masterstroke… you really didnt know what the hell he was going to do next. This movie wouldnt be nearly as good if it were a simple “poison the reservoir” story, or suchlike. His motivation wasn’t money (he burned his share), or power… he really did just want to “watch the world burn”. An ememy like that, who doesnt care if he lives or dies, or doesnt seem to feel or care about pain (I loved it when Batman punched his hand in the interrogation room) is a very dangerous adversary. It was always unclear what his motivation was, as it seemed to change from scene to scene (he seemed determined to kill a prone Batman after the big-rig crash). A truly unique creation, which honours the characters sixty-odd year history.
Well, he had a plan… Chaos and destruction… And it’s not as if he wasn’t rich already (he had robbed all the other mobsters before, he already had some of their money)… He just wasn’t greedy.
Did I miss something, or were both of Gordon’s kids boys?
Nope, boy and girl.
My question is, how many people did Dent kill? I could swear that Gordon says 5 when talking to Batman, but the only ones I can remember are the crooked cop at the bar and the mobster and his driver (assuming the mobster didn’t survive the crash). He didn’t kill the other dirty cop, the coin came up clean when he flipped it for her. Who am I missing?
I thought they were too!
-Joe
Maybe the bartender at the bar where the first cop was drinking?
Speaking of money, did anyone else find it silly that they were fixated on actual cash? :dubious: We’re supposed to believe that Lau had millions of banknotes physically moved to Hong Kong?
No reason for him to kill the bartender. And even if he did, that would still only be 4 people. 1 short still.
No. He didn’t say he took it with him, he just hid it somewhere none of the mob bosses knew about.
In fact, they do. All is revealed in Superman #330 (Dec 1978), “The Master Mesmerizer of Metropolis!” in which Superman confronts both the hypnotic threat of the villainous Spellbinder and the decades-old mystery of his own tenuous disguise. Looking at his own bespectacled reflection in a mirror, Superman grudgingly admits: “Hmm… now that I think about it… that’s the dumbest disguise I’ve ever seen! Who am I supposed to look like… a totally different person?” Truly one of the great moments of comic history, even if the main storyline does focus on a third-rate Batman villain named Delbert.
Anyhoo… I just got back from The Dark Knight, and I am still genuinely perplexed. I feel like this was the sort of movie that I should have hugely enjoyed; and yet I didn’t, particularly. I’m pretty far along in life for my basic cinematic tastes to just suddenly up and shift like that. Maybe this is a sign that my medication needs adjusting.
Things I liked:
Wow, it appears that it is possible to successfully depict Batman expressing optimism, and generally indicating that he is motivated to fight crime for reasons other than being a colossal dick! How about that?
At last we are approaching a cinematic Batman costume design that looks as though it could plausibly be worn while fighting crime, instead of the neckless bodysculpture style that requires the criminals to run up directly in front, one at a time, before being ponderously kicked into submission.
White ‘sonar’ eye lenses-- okay, that was hilarious. Little stuff like that shows how these guys are sincerely into the Bat-mythos.
Harvey Dent may just be the most interesting comic book movie villain ever. (So of course we won’t ever be seeing him again…)
Wow, Rachel Dawes is re-introduced as a complex and savvy comic book movie love interest in a poignant and engaging romantic triangle! (So of course…)
Things I didn’t:
As I watched the antics of the Gotham City police, a remark made by Crow T. Robot of MST3K came to mind: “These guys are dumber than invertebrates!”
Individually there were some really good scenes: however, overall the script didn’t exhibit much structure. It’s like the writers wrote a bunch of scenes that they liked, and then weren’t really sure how to fit them together, so they just sort of strung them all end to end. And if anybody needed to get from one scene to the next, they would simply get into a car, and the driver would kidnap them into the next scene. How many times did they use the random betrayal and/or kidnapping plot device? It felt like about a million. Kidnapping eventually loses its impact if you’re just using it as an excuse to end scenes.
I wish I had a clearer idea of whether Heath Ledger was doing a good job as the Joker; but the makeup department was working so hard at making him look ‘scary’ that it profoundly distracted me from any moments of scary acting. He didn’t really have a surfeit of funny lines, either, which is kind of odd given that he’s “the Joker.” Ledger did have the Cesar Romero cackle down pretty good, I must admit.
I also found the ‘Joker noise’-- what was that, a joy buzzer?-- got old by the second time it was used. Ah, you say he’s being crazy and menacing, soundtrack? Thank you so much for the heads-up on that.
Speaking of the soundtrack: I thought Batman Begins was an effective step away from the cartoonish Elfman tradition. By contrast, The Dark Knight had one drab, monotonous theme-- what was that, violins? Cellos? The incessant noot-noot-noot was amazingly effective at building non-tension.