I finally seen The Black Knight yesterday.

[Dave Mc]

I did think him constantly retelling his origin was a BRILLIANT touch.

[thunderbolt]

Hey, is it just me, or is the music track on the dvd way too frickin' loud? I turn it up to hear the dialog, then I get a blast of strings.

[The Toyroom]

^ It's not just you....constantly fiddling with the volume control throughout the flick

[kingdom warrior]

Hey, is it just me, or is the music track on the dvd way too frickin' loud? I turn it up to hear the dialog, then I get a blast of strings.

It is way too loud it was driving me crazy!!! On top of Batman's voice...

[thunderbolt]

Then I have it too loud and Mrs TBolt hollers at me. It doesn't help that every one inthe film talks pretty low, like Oldman and Ledger.

[MIB41]

Hard to beat a film with a good story and good actors. The concept is grounded on the idea of what he might be like if he COULD exist. Using that perspective, I think you should go back and watch it again. Adam West may be the vintage-CAMP-version, but he's not the realistic version.

[palitoy]

I liked the movie but it's not my favorite comic book movie (or batman movie) mostly because in making it realistic, they seemed to boil out a flavour I like. It's still a great film, but if you removed the bat suit and clown make up, it would still be the same movie more or less.

Two touchs I enjoyed about Ledger's performance, one is when the Joker takes offense to being called crazy, it bothers him so much that he breaks character. I also just loved the glee he expresses when being beaten in the interogation scene, it's a big distinction.

As for Maggie Gyllenhaal not being attractive, whatever there "Hef". Anyway, Bruce's love for Rachel is pretty much tied to her character as he's not supposed to be superficial.

Oldman is the most screen accurate commisioner Gordon ever, My god Mike, did you think Pat Hingle was?

[huedell]

I liked the movie but it's not my favorite comic book movie (or batman movie) mostly because in making it realistic, they seemed to boil out a flavour I like. It's still a great film, but if you removed the bat suit and clown make up, it would still be the same movie more or less.

Two touchs I enjoyed about Ledger's performance, one is when the Joker takes offense to being called crazy, it bothers him so much that he breaks character. I also just loved the glee he expresses when being beaten in the interogation scene, it's a big distinction.

As for Maggie Gyllenhaal not being attractive, whatever there "Hef". Anyway, Bruce's love for Rachel is pretty much tied to her character as he's not supposed to be superficial.

Oldman is the most screen accurate commisioner Gordon ever, My god Mike, did you think Pat Hingle was?

Again, another review I really agree with.

It's so easy to be swept up in this bat-love-fest with TDK and
say this film is the best thing since sliced kryptonite---
it has a lot of what makes a great movie.

Still I had some notable issues with it---mostly what Dave and Brian brought up.

[ctc]

>in making it realistic, they seemed to boil out a flavour I like.

I will NEVER understand the whole "realistic superhero" fetish. "We want a guy in a bat costume, who runs around with impunity, never gets shot, drives around in a REALLY noticable tank that nobody just follows back to his lair, and he fights wacky guys who crawl out of the woodwork and nearly destroy the city every week with elaborate deathtraps using a lot of explosives and equipment that must have fallen off a truck or something 'cos the authorities never seem to notice it being sold."

"....but do all that realisticly."

I think the missing flavour is "novelty." "Realism" usually equals "whatever conventional wisdom currently says is right," and the result is usually a lot of stories that are all pretty similar. The whole point of doing a superhero story is that you don't HAVE to be realistic. A realistic Batman story would feature a very young Bruce Wayne being diagnosed with PTSD and possible antisocial tendencies, getting the help he needs (the kid IS rich, after all. I'm sure SOMEONE was interested in his welfare....) growing up to head a multinational billion dollar company, making guest appearances on talkshows with his series of trophy wives....

....and eventually dying in a weird explosion wherein a thousand nitro-laden poodle balloons take out the base of his main office. So it's not even realism that you get in a realistic superhero story. It's flavour of the week/month/decade/whatever.

I maintain that the key to ANY story is "internal consistency." That's what makes it all SEEM real. The idea that if something happens once it'll happen again. Or that people, places and giant two lane roadmasters don't just disappear when no longer convenient.

Oddly enough, there's a review of "Quantum of Solace" that supports this idea. Please note that there's a LOT of really harsh language:

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse....tum_of_phallus

But the part that I think applies:

"You know what's another word for realistic? Boring. If I wanted realism, I'd walk down the street to get Mexican food, and maybe stop by a Borders and pick up some magazines. You know why they don't make movies about me shopping for magazines? That's because nobody [cares]. And that's what Quantum of Solace is: me shopping for magazines, with no Mexican food. I don't see movies for realism, and if I did, I sure as hell wouldn't watch one made by some [clown] who thinks "reality" can best be represented with the aid of 219 special effects artists."

(The square brackets are my edits.)

But when you start conforming to that whole "real" thing you start limiting what you can do, and what your world can be. Which cuts down the whole "sense of wonder" bit, which is kinda what superheroes are based on.

Don C.

[thunderbolt]

^^ The problem with "novelty" in movies is that it gets abused and you end up with a Schumacher Batfilm or Superman IV.

[The Bat]

^^ The problem with "novelty" in movies is that it gets abused and you end up with a Schumacher Batfilm or Superman IV.

EXACTLY!! You hit the Nail on the Head Joe!

[ctc]

>The problem with "novelty" in movies is that it gets abused and you end up with a Schumacher Batfilm or Superman IV.

....which is why I think what people really want is "plausibility." They want things that make sense given the situation of the story. Internal consistency.

Don C.

[Mikey]

This might have been mentioned before but imo, the whole idea of Batman is the very unrealistic, so trying to make it as realistic as possible just makes it that much more unbelievable or even unintentionally funny.

The classic Batman TV series overcame this by letting us be part of the joke.... Even Burton's did that to some extent.

This new movie series doesn't do that.
It tries too hard to make us think we're watching a legit action crime drama.
For me, it does work but not in the context they intended.

It's enjoyable for actually a different reason .......
The seriousness of the movie's setting and tone is actually the joke.

Batman no matter what you do will always be a comedy.
Yes, on many different levels depending on the genre, but a comedy nonetheless.

This newer version is just a different kind of joke .....
Deadpan, I think they call it.

Hey, that would be a good Bat Villian

[The Bat]

....which is why I think what people really want is "plausibility." They want things that make sense given the situation of the story. Internal consistency.

Don C.

Very logical.

[Earth 2 Chris]

The problem with "novelty" in movies is that it gets abused and you end up with a Schumacher Batfilm or Superman IV.

Yep.

I can see how the "realism" of DK would turn some people off. But honestly, the Batman movies were taken to the fantastic extreme by Schmuck-maker. I think Nolan kept more outright fantasty elements (all the gliding for instance) in Batman Begins because he was new to the franchise and hadn't proven himself, and wasn't sure how audiences would accept a grittier, more grounded Batman. In DK he was able to put his own vision across more, and that's a Batman that is as grounded to reality as possible. That still includes taking gadgets and real technology and extrapolating on what they really can do, and having the public (and many officials) more-or-less accept a caped vigilante.

I like all kinds of different Batman stories. From the fantastic sci-fi to the gritty crime drama. To me this is a very valid interpreation, with a direction based on the very earliest Batman stories, and of course later stories like Year One and Long Halloween. That Batman had never been successfully put on screen before. Burton his on some of it in the first movie, but Burton is incapable of putting across realism.

I have told most people not to think of it as a super hero movie. It's more like a crime drama with a guy in a bat suit and a killer clown. And that's fine by me.

Chris