|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 8:10 pm
-The Gray Legend- Sakyh -The Gray Legend- Wow...that movie scores with me a whopping "Meh"! I know I'm gonna get hate for this, but the first half was boring and convoluded, and Two-Face seemed to have a "Venom Factor" to him, meaning he was a character who was brought in at the middle to end of the movie who had all the potential to be a major villain and better developed in the next movie, but instead just draws out the movie longer than it needs to be and is killed off, unfortunately. Similar to Venom in Spider Man 3. Also, what IS it with writers putting in two or three villains in one movie? It just gets complicated. I did like Joker's character, but the problem with him is that he never really did anything Joker-ish. He did a lot of things that really just makes him a thug wearing face paint. The Joker is SO much smarter and so much more sinister than to just make people choose if they want to blow other people up. Plus there was no real final battle between Joker and Batman, which it seemed like the trailers were playing up to. But since Joker's not dead, perhaps they're saving it for the next movie. One last thing: why is it that I can never tell what Batman is saying? Christian Bale works as Bruce, but when he speaks as Batman, it's impossible to hear what he's saying because his affected voice is really, really...terrible. I'm sure that conversation at the end between Gordon and Batman was super important, but I had no idea what he was saying and therefore didn't know what the conversation was about. Yes, I'm nitpicking, and yes, it's probably just sheer disappointment from how built up it was from advertisement and hype, as well as how awesome Batman Begins was, but...definitely not happy with it. Seeing it again Tuesday though (I didn't arrange it, my mom did), maybe some things I missed I can catch the second time. For the last time who said Two-Face actually died in the movie? The casket was closed. granted, two face COULD have been in it. But just as easily not be. Iot was more of a side origin story for Two-Face. And he was in NO way EVER the big baddie of the movie. Joker was the adversary in the movie from minute 1 to minute 120. Legend that wasn't entirely pointed at you. I've been hearing some people moaning about that. And eh, I though Batman Begins sucked. And yeah, you'll get flamed buddy, but hey, everyone's bound to have different opinions. And unlike jackass fanboys, you have actual reasoning behind it. But really, I don't think he fell into the category of venom failure. Venom was pumped up as the main baddie in Spider Man 3, but they sucked out his glory and reduced it to a 30 minute camio. The JOKER was what this movie hyped as their baddie, not Two-Face. The Joker simply used Harvey as his pawn in his grand scheme, and Two-Face was the end result. Meaning that Two-Face (and therefor Harvey Dent) was in the movie purely for Joker to use. And, while odd, I can see the reasoning for the voice change. Batman was an alter ego for Bruce, so he changed his voice, perhaps to be more intimidating, perhaps to simply make it harder for he to be recongized as Bruce Wayne. And for that matter, Batman has always (going off cartoon series here) had that raspey voice, so it makes sense for him to do it in the movie. Dunno why you couldn't understand him though... And why do you think Joker & Batman needed a final battle? The Joker is not known as a brawler. he's a schemer who comes up with sinisater plans because he's just awesomely bored and that's what he chooses to do to stake off the boredom. If nothing else, the final battle between them was over morals and ethics, not physical might.And lastly, whhhyyyyy do you find Batman Begins to be so great? That's my problem. Why have him anyway? I don't mind him BECOMING Two-Face in the movie. But why did he have to do a whole bunch of stuff and then supposedly die AFTER he became two face? They could have said he escaped and that would have been that, wait for the next movie for him to REALLY do some bad s**t. I understand why he had the voice, and I agree with it, but...why did it have to be so bad? I can barely tell what he's saying sometimes, and in the beginning when he was yelling back to the impostors as he was getting back in the car, it sounded bad and out of character for Batman. They don't need a final fist fight. But they need a final moment of judgment, a deciding moment. Keep in mind, Joker is Batman's main enemy, and Joker is his slight superior in intellect. They're the perfect rivals, and everyone knows that. There needs to be a grand conflict of some sort. The way they showed it is that Joker gets caught, gets out, and gets caught again. Despite his smarts, he's not very good at eluding the law, now is he? Batman Begins was a great movie simply because it did a lot of stuff I didn't expect. Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul are two villains that you wouldn't expect to see as main antagonists in a Batman movie, simply because they're not as well-known as Joker or Two-Face. Plus the whole concept with Henri Ducard was, while cliche, surprising to someone who's not too familiar with Ra's Al Ghul (namely me). I was thinking today, if I had remembered what Ra's Al Ghul had looked like, I probably could have placed Ducard as him from the beginning. It basically did a great job of introducing Batman to a new audience. Xera: He's extremely smart, he's extremely dangerous, he's extremely cruel. In the comic books he beat Robin to death with a crowbar. In the series he created a device that rewrote Tim Drake's DNA that changed him into a Mini-joker. I'm not nitpicking for no reason, I'm not worrying about the fact that Two-Face and Venom are villains of different magnitudes, the point is that they're both villains who could have scored themselves places as main antagonists in the sequel to Dark Knight and Spider Man 4, but instead were crammed in there and drew the movie out, and taking away a lot of the characters' defining attributes. For example, Venom's bulging muscles and deep, nasty voice, as well as Two-Face's darkness and mysteriousness. Instead Two-Face seemed kinda like "WE'RE HERE! WE'RE QUEER ANGRY, WE'RE GONNA KILL SOME SUMBITCHES!" In Venom's case especially, he just seemed kind of rushed. As I said before Venom is a prime villain in the Spider-Man Comics, and the Animated series. Two-Face isn't. That was Batman Beyond, that's a side note. Also Scarecrow is meh villain and so is Mr....Karate guy? Also Two-Face in the next movie should be facing off Scarface in a mob war. Since Two-Face was never actually presumed to be dead. They thought he was dead. They didn't say "He's DEAD!" The casket could of been Rachel. And I'll say it once more, in Spider-Man there are three main Villains: The Kingpin, Green Goblin, and Venom. In Batman it's : Joker, Penguin and Freeze and probably Strange.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 8:27 pm
l -Xera- l The Dark Also Two-Face in the next movie should be facing off Scarface in a mob war. Since Two-Face was never actually presumed to be dead. They thought he was dead. They didn't say "He's DEAD!" The casket could of been Rachel. Thank you! Stop saying Two-face died in the movie! they never said he friggen died! The Harvey Dent funeral was to shield the public from what he had become! For gosh sakes they never said he died.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 8:30 pm
l -Xera- l The Dark -The Gray Legend- Sakyh -The Gray Legend- Wow...that movie scores with me a whopping "Meh"! I know I'm gonna get hate for this, but the first half was boring and convoluded, and Two-Face seemed to have a "Venom Factor" to him, meaning he was a character who was brought in at the middle to end of the movie who had all the potential to be a major villain and better developed in the next movie, but instead just draws out the movie longer than it needs to be and is killed off, unfortunately. Similar to Venom in Spider Man 3. Also, what IS it with writers putting in two or three villains in one movie? It just gets complicated. I did like Joker's character, but the problem with him is that he never really did anything Joker-ish. He did a lot of things that really just makes him a thug wearing face paint. The Joker is SO much smarter and so much more sinister than to just make people choose if they want to blow other people up. Plus there was no real final battle between Joker and Batman, which it seemed like the trailers were playing up to. But since Joker's not dead, perhaps they're saving it for the next movie. One last thing: why is it that I can never tell what Batman is saying? Christian Bale works as Bruce, but when he speaks as Batman, it's impossible to hear what he's saying because his affected voice is really, really...terrible. I'm sure that conversation at the end between Gordon and Batman was super important, but I had no idea what he was saying and therefore didn't know what the conversation was about. Yes, I'm nitpicking, and yes, it's probably just sheer disappointment from how built up it was from advertisement and hype, as well as how awesome Batman Begins was, but...definitely not happy with it. Seeing it again Tuesday though (I didn't arrange it, my mom did), maybe some things I missed I can catch the second time. For the last time who said Two-Face actually died in the movie? The casket was closed. granted, two face COULD have been in it. But just as easily not be. Iot was more of a side origin story for Two-Face. And he was in NO way EVER the big baddie of the movie. Joker was the adversary in the movie from minute 1 to minute 120. Legend that wasn't entirely pointed at you. I've been hearing some people moaning about that. And eh, I though Batman Begins sucked. And yeah, you'll get flamed buddy, but hey, everyone's bound to have different opinions. And unlike jackass fanboys, you have actual reasoning behind it. But really, I don't think he fell into the category of venom failure. Venom was pumped up as the main baddie in Spider Man 3, but they sucked out his glory and reduced it to a 30 minute camio. The JOKER was what this movie hyped as their baddie, not Two-Face. The Joker simply used Harvey as his pawn in his grand scheme, and Two-Face was the end result. Meaning that Two-Face (and therefor Harvey Dent) was in the movie purely for Joker to use. And, while odd, I can see the reasoning for the voice change. Batman was an alter ego for Bruce, so he changed his voice, perhaps to be more intimidating, perhaps to simply make it harder for he to be recongized as Bruce Wayne. And for that matter, Batman has always (going off cartoon series here) had that raspey voice, so it makes sense for him to do it in the movie. Dunno why you couldn't understand him though... And why do you think Joker & Batman needed a final battle? The Joker is not known as a brawler. he's a schemer who comes up with sinisater plans because he's just awesomely bored and that's what he chooses to do to stake off the boredom. If nothing else, the final battle between them was over morals and ethics, not physical might.And lastly, whhhyyyyy do you find Batman Begins to be so great? That's my problem. Why have him anyway? I don't mind him BECOMING Two-Face in the movie. But why did he have to do a whole bunch of stuff and then supposedly die AFTER he became two face? They could have said he escaped and that would have been that, wait for the next movie for him to REALLY do some bad s**t. I understand why he had the voice, and I agree with it, but...why did it have to be so bad? I can barely tell what he's saying sometimes, and in the beginning when he was yelling back to the impostors as he was getting back in the car, it sounded bad and out of character for Batman. They don't need a final fist fight. But they need a final moment of judgment, a deciding moment. Keep in mind, Joker is Batman's main enemy, and Joker is his slight superior in intellect. They're the perfect rivals, and everyone knows that. There needs to be a grand conflict of some sort. The way they showed it is that Joker gets caught, gets out, and gets caught again. Despite his smarts, he's not very good at eluding the law, now is he? Batman Begins was a great movie simply because it did a lot of stuff I didn't expect. Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul are two villains that you wouldn't expect to see as main antagonists in a Batman movie, simply because they're not as well-known as Joker or Two-Face. Plus the whole concept with Henri Ducard was, while cliche, surprising to someone who's not too familiar with Ra's Al Ghul (namely me). I was thinking today, if I had remembered what Ra's Al Ghul had looked like, I probably could have placed Ducard as him from the beginning. It basically did a great job of introducing Batman to a new audience. Xera: He's extremely smart, he's extremely dangerous, he's extremely cruel. In the comic books he beat Robin to death with a crowbar. In the series he created a device that rewrote Tim Drake's DNA that changed him into a Mini-joker. I'm not nitpicking for no reason, I'm not worrying about the fact that Two-Face and Venom are villains of different magnitudes, the point is that they're both villains who could have scored themselves places as main antagonists in the sequel to Dark Knight and Spider Man 4, but instead were crammed in there and drew the movie out, and taking away a lot of the characters' defining attributes. For example, Venom's bulging muscles and deep, nasty voice, as well as Two-Face's darkness and mysteriousness. Instead Two-Face seemed kinda like "WE'RE HERE! WE'RE QUEER ANGRY, WE'RE GONNA KILL SOME SUMBITCHES!" In Venom's case especially, he just seemed kind of rushed. As I said before Venom is a prime villain in the Spider-Man Comics, and the Animated series. Two-Face isn't. That was Batman Beyond, that's a side note. Also Scarecrow is meh villain and so is Mr....Karate guy? Also Two-Face in the next movie should be facing off Scarface in a mob war. Since Two-Face was never actually presumed to be dead. They thought he was dead. They didn't say "He's DEAD!" The casket could of been Rachel. And I'll say it once more, in Spider-Man there are three main Villains: The Kingpin, Green Goblin, and Venom. In Batman it's : Joker, Penguin and Freeze and probably Strange. I don't think I've read a stupider sentence in my life. At the funeral there was a picture of Harvey, and Comissioner Gordon's words were obviously about Harvey. It doesn't matter what kind of villains they are, you're not getting my point. The fact is they could have supported a whole movie BY THEMSELVES, but instead were crammed in with villains who got much more screen time and a lot of plot development that could have happened with them was nonexistent. I don't just mean origins. I mean after the fact as well. Sure, they went into Two-Face's origins, but after that, what? He shot a few people and threatened' Gordon's family. He could have done a lot more. You said yourself he and Scarface could have got in a mob battle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 8:38 pm
-The Gray Legend- l -Xera- l The Dark -The Gray Legend- Sakyh -The Gray Legend- Wow...that movie scores with me a whopping "Meh"! I know I'm gonna get hate for this, but the first half was boring and convoluded, and Two-Face seemed to have a "Venom Factor" to him, meaning he was a character who was brought in at the middle to end of the movie who had all the potential to be a major villain and better developed in the next movie, but instead just draws out the movie longer than it needs to be and is killed off, unfortunately. Similar to Venom in Spider Man 3. Also, what IS it with writers putting in two or three villains in one movie? It just gets complicated. I did like Joker's character, but the problem with him is that he never really did anything Joker-ish. He did a lot of things that really just makes him a thug wearing face paint. The Joker is SO much smarter and so much more sinister than to just make people choose if they want to blow other people up. Plus there was no real final battle between Joker and Batman, which it seemed like the trailers were playing up to. But since Joker's not dead, perhaps they're saving it for the next movie. One last thing: why is it that I can never tell what Batman is saying? Christian Bale works as Bruce, but when he speaks as Batman, it's impossible to hear what he's saying because his affected voice is really, really...terrible. I'm sure that conversation at the end between Gordon and Batman was super important, but I had no idea what he was saying and therefore didn't know what the conversation was about. Yes, I'm nitpicking, and yes, it's probably just sheer disappointment from how built up it was from advertisement and hype, as well as how awesome Batman Begins was, but...definitely not happy with it. Seeing it again Tuesday though (I didn't arrange it, my mom did), maybe some things I missed I can catch the second time. For the last time who said Two-Face actually died in the movie? The casket was closed. granted, two face COULD have been in it. But just as easily not be. Iot was more of a side origin story for Two-Face. And he was in NO way EVER the big baddie of the movie. Joker was the adversary in the movie from minute 1 to minute 120. Legend that wasn't entirely pointed at you. I've been hearing some people moaning about that. And eh, I though Batman Begins sucked. And yeah, you'll get flamed buddy, but hey, everyone's bound to have different opinions. And unlike jackass fanboys, you have actual reasoning behind it. But really, I don't think he fell into the category of venom failure. Venom was pumped up as the main baddie in Spider Man 3, but they sucked out his glory and reduced it to a 30 minute camio. The JOKER was what this movie hyped as their baddie, not Two-Face. The Joker simply used Harvey as his pawn in his grand scheme, and Two-Face was the end result. Meaning that Two-Face (and therefor Harvey Dent) was in the movie purely for Joker to use. And, while odd, I can see the reasoning for the voice change. Batman was an alter ego for Bruce, so he changed his voice, perhaps to be more intimidating, perhaps to simply make it harder for he to be recongized as Bruce Wayne. And for that matter, Batman has always (going off cartoon series here) had that raspey voice, so it makes sense for him to do it in the movie. Dunno why you couldn't understand him though... And why do you think Joker & Batman needed a final battle? The Joker is not known as a brawler. he's a schemer who comes up with sinisater plans because he's just awesomely bored and that's what he chooses to do to stake off the boredom. If nothing else, the final battle between them was over morals and ethics, not physical might.And lastly, whhhyyyyy do you find Batman Begins to be so great? That's my problem. Why have him anyway? I don't mind him BECOMING Two-Face in the movie. But why did he have to do a whole bunch of stuff and then supposedly die AFTER he became two face? They could have said he escaped and that would have been that, wait for the next movie for him to REALLY do some bad s**t. I understand why he had the voice, and I agree with it, but...why did it have to be so bad? I can barely tell what he's saying sometimes, and in the beginning when he was yelling back to the impostors as he was getting back in the car, it sounded bad and out of character for Batman. They don't need a final fist fight. But they need a final moment of judgment, a deciding moment. Keep in mind, Joker is Batman's main enemy, and Joker is his slight superior in intellect. They're the perfect rivals, and everyone knows that. There needs to be a grand conflict of some sort. The way they showed it is that Joker gets caught, gets out, and gets caught again. Despite his smarts, he's not very good at eluding the law, now is he? Batman Begins was a great movie simply because it did a lot of stuff I didn't expect. Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul are two villains that you wouldn't expect to see as main antagonists in a Batman movie, simply because they're not as well-known as Joker or Two-Face. Plus the whole concept with Henri Ducard was, while cliche, surprising to someone who's not too familiar with Ra's Al Ghul (namely me). I was thinking today, if I had remembered what Ra's Al Ghul had looked like, I probably could have placed Ducard as him from the beginning. It basically did a great job of introducing Batman to a new audience. Xera: He's extremely smart, he's extremely dangerous, he's extremely cruel. In the comic books he beat Robin to death with a crowbar. In the series he created a device that rewrote Tim Drake's DNA that changed him into a Mini-joker. I'm not nitpicking for no reason, I'm not worrying about the fact that Two-Face and Venom are villains of different magnitudes, the point is that they're both villains who could have scored themselves places as main antagonists in the sequel to Dark Knight and Spider Man 4, but instead were crammed in there and drew the movie out, and taking away a lot of the characters' defining attributes. For example, Venom's bulging muscles and deep, nasty voice, as well as Two-Face's darkness and mysteriousness. Instead Two-Face seemed kinda like "WE'RE HERE! WE'RE QUEER ANGRY, WE'RE GONNA KILL SOME SUMBITCHES!" In Venom's case especially, he just seemed kind of rushed. As I said before Venom is a prime villain in the Spider-Man Comics, and the Animated series. Two-Face isn't. That was Batman Beyond, that's a side note. Also Scarecrow is meh villain and so is Mr....Karate guy? Also Two-Face in the next movie should be facing off Scarface in a mob war. Since Two-Face was never actually presumed to be dead. They thought he was dead. They didn't say "He's DEAD!" The casket could of been Rachel. And I'll say it once more, in Spider-Man there are three main Villains: The Kingpin, Green Goblin, and Venom. In Batman it's : Joker, Penguin and Freeze and probably Strange. I don't think I've read a stupider sentence in my life. At the funeral there was a picture of Harvey, and Comissioner Gordon's words were obviously about Harvey. It doesn't matter what kind of villains they are, you're not getting my point. The fact is they could have supported a whole movie BY THEMSELVES, but instead were crammed in with villains who got much more screen time and a lot of plot development that could have happened with them was nonexistent. I don't just mean origins. I mean after the fact as well. Sure, they went into Two-Face's origins, but after that, what? He shot a few people and threatened' Gordon's family. He could have done a lot more. You said yourself he and Scarface could have got in a mob battle. Maybe because it was a PR move? Dude they didn't announced he was dead in the first place. He might of gotten a few broken bones and ribs. However he might of meant the DA was dead and Two-Face still lives. You don't know what happened, stop assuming what happened. Only Noel knows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Drinky McIrish Vice Captain
|
Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 9:44 pm
l -Xera- l The Dark -The Gray Legend- Sakyh -The Gray Legend- Wow...that movie scores with me a whopping "Meh"! I know I'm gonna get hate for this, but the first half was boring and convoluded, and Two-Face seemed to have a "Venom Factor" to him, meaning he was a character who was brought in at the middle to end of the movie who had all the potential to be a major villain and better developed in the next movie, but instead just draws out the movie longer than it needs to be and is killed off, unfortunately. Similar to Venom in Spider Man 3. Also, what IS it with writers putting in two or three villains in one movie? It just gets complicated. I did like Joker's character, but the problem with him is that he never really did anything Joker-ish. He did a lot of things that really just makes him a thug wearing face paint. The Joker is SO much smarter and so much more sinister than to just make people choose if they want to blow other people up. Plus there was no real final battle between Joker and Batman, which it seemed like the trailers were playing up to. But since Joker's not dead, perhaps they're saving it for the next movie. One last thing: why is it that I can never tell what Batman is saying? Christian Bale works as Bruce, but when he speaks as Batman, it's impossible to hear what he's saying because his affected voice is really, really...terrible. I'm sure that conversation at the end between Gordon and Batman was super important, but I had no idea what he was saying and therefore didn't know what the conversation was about. Yes, I'm nitpicking, and yes, it's probably just sheer disappointment from how built up it was from advertisement and hype, as well as how awesome Batman Begins was, but...definitely not happy with it. Seeing it again Tuesday though (I didn't arrange it, my mom did), maybe some things I missed I can catch the second time. For the last time who said Two-Face actually died in the movie? The casket was closed. granted, two face COULD have been in it. But just as easily not be. Iot was more of a side origin story for Two-Face. And he was in NO way EVER the big baddie of the movie. Joker was the adversary in the movie from minute 1 to minute 120. Legend that wasn't entirely pointed at you. I've been hearing some people moaning about that. And eh, I though Batman Begins sucked. And yeah, you'll get flamed buddy, but hey, everyone's bound to have different opinions. And unlike jackass fanboys, you have actual reasoning behind it. But really, I don't think he fell into the category of venom failure. Venom was pumped up as the main baddie in Spider Man 3, but they sucked out his glory and reduced it to a 30 minute camio. The JOKER was what this movie hyped as their baddie, not Two-Face. The Joker simply used Harvey as his pawn in his grand scheme, and Two-Face was the end result. Meaning that Two-Face (and therefor Harvey Dent) was in the movie purely for Joker to use. And, while odd, I can see the reasoning for the voice change. Batman was an alter ego for Bruce, so he changed his voice, perhaps to be more intimidating, perhaps to simply make it harder for he to be recongized as Bruce Wayne. And for that matter, Batman has always (going off cartoon series here) had that raspey voice, so it makes sense for him to do it in the movie. Dunno why you couldn't understand him though... And why do you think Joker & Batman needed a final battle? The Joker is not known as a brawler. he's a schemer who comes up with sinisater plans because he's just awesomely bored and that's what he chooses to do to stake off the boredom. If nothing else, the final battle between them was over morals and ethics, not physical might.And lastly, whhhyyyyy do you find Batman Begins to be so great? That's my problem. Why have him anyway? I don't mind him BECOMING Two-Face in the movie. But why did he have to do a whole bunch of stuff and then supposedly die AFTER he became two face? They could have said he escaped and that would have been that, wait for the next movie for him to REALLY do some bad s**t. I understand why he had the voice, and I agree with it, but...why did it have to be so bad? I can barely tell what he's saying sometimes, and in the beginning when he was yelling back to the impostors as he was getting back in the car, it sounded bad and out of character for Batman. They don't need a final fist fight. But they need a final moment of judgment, a deciding moment. Keep in mind, Joker is Batman's main enemy, and Joker is his slight superior in intellect. They're the perfect rivals, and everyone knows that. There needs to be a grand conflict of some sort. The way they showed it is that Joker gets caught, gets out, and gets caught again. Despite his smarts, he's not very good at eluding the law, now is he? Batman Begins was a great movie simply because it did a lot of stuff I didn't expect. Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul are two villains that you wouldn't expect to see as main antagonists in a Batman movie, simply because they're not as well-known as Joker or Two-Face. Plus the whole concept with Henri Ducard was, while cliche, surprising to someone who's not too familiar with Ra's Al Ghul (namely me). I was thinking today, if I had remembered what Ra's Al Ghul had looked like, I probably could have placed Ducard as him from the beginning. It basically did a great job of introducing Batman to a new audience. Xera: He's extremely smart, he's extremely dangerous, he's extremely cruel. In the comic books he beat Robin to death with a crowbar. In the series he created a device that rewrote Tim Drake's DNA that changed him into a Mini-joker. I'm not nitpicking for no reason, I'm not worrying about the fact that Two-Face and Venom are villains of different magnitudes, the point is that they're both villains who could have scored themselves places as main antagonists in the sequel to Dark Knight and Spider Man 4, but instead were crammed in there and drew the movie out, and taking away a lot of the characters' defining attributes. For example, Venom's bulging muscles and deep, nasty voice, as well as Two-Face's darkness and mysteriousness. Instead Two-Face seemed kinda like "WE'RE HERE! WE'RE QUEER ANGRY, WE'RE GONNA KILL SOME SUMBITCHES!" In Venom's case especially, he just seemed kind of rushed. As I said before Venom is a prime villain in the Spider-Man Comics, and the Animated series. Two-Face isn't. That was Batman Beyond, that's a side note. Also Scarecrow is meh villain and so is Mr....Karate guy? Also Two-Face in the next movie should be facing off Scarface in a mob war. Since Two-Face was never actually presumed to be dead. They thought he was dead. They didn't say "He's DEAD!" The casket could of been Rachel. And I'll say it once more, in Spider-Man there are three main Villains: The Kingpin, Green Goblin, and Venom. In Batman it's : Joker, Penguin and Freeze and probably Strange.Nope, there's a reason why Batman has a Rogues Gallery, he doesn't have a primary villain. Two-Face, Joker, Poison Ivy, Mr. Freeze, Ras Al Ghul, Scarecrow, Penguin, Clayface, Riddler, Catwoman, and villains like that are all part of that gallery. Joker is a major villain, but each one takes on a part of Batman that the other cannot. Hugo Strange isn't even part of the Rogues Gallery.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:01 pm
Drinky McIrish l -Xera- l The Dark -The Gray Legend- Sakyh -The Gray Legend- Wow...that movie scores with me a whopping "Meh"! I know I'm gonna get hate for this, but the first half was boring and convoluded, and Two-Face seemed to have a "Venom Factor" to him, meaning he was a character who was brought in at the middle to end of the movie who had all the potential to be a major villain and better developed in the next movie, but instead just draws out the movie longer than it needs to be and is killed off, unfortunately. Similar to Venom in Spider Man 3. Also, what IS it with writers putting in two or three villains in one movie? It just gets complicated. I did like Joker's character, but the problem with him is that he never really did anything Joker-ish. He did a lot of things that really just makes him a thug wearing face paint. The Joker is SO much smarter and so much more sinister than to just make people choose if they want to blow other people up. Plus there was no real final battle between Joker and Batman, which it seemed like the trailers were playing up to. But since Joker's not dead, perhaps they're saving it for the next movie. One last thing: why is it that I can never tell what Batman is saying? Christian Bale works as Bruce, but when he speaks as Batman, it's impossible to hear what he's saying because his affected voice is really, really...terrible. I'm sure that conversation at the end between Gordon and Batman was super important, but I had no idea what he was saying and therefore didn't know what the conversation was about. Yes, I'm nitpicking, and yes, it's probably just sheer disappointment from how built up it was from advertisement and hype, as well as how awesome Batman Begins was, but...definitely not happy with it. Seeing it again Tuesday though (I didn't arrange it, my mom did), maybe some things I missed I can catch the second time. For the last time who said Two-Face actually died in the movie? The casket was closed. granted, two face COULD have been in it. But just as easily not be. Iot was more of a side origin story for Two-Face. And he was in NO way EVER the big baddie of the movie. Joker was the adversary in the movie from minute 1 to minute 120. Legend that wasn't entirely pointed at you. I've been hearing some people moaning about that. And eh, I though Batman Begins sucked. And yeah, you'll get flamed buddy, but hey, everyone's bound to have different opinions. And unlike jackass fanboys, you have actual reasoning behind it. But really, I don't think he fell into the category of venom failure. Venom was pumped up as the main baddie in Spider Man 3, but they sucked out his glory and reduced it to a 30 minute camio. The JOKER was what this movie hyped as their baddie, not Two-Face. The Joker simply used Harvey as his pawn in his grand scheme, and Two-Face was the end result. Meaning that Two-Face (and therefor Harvey Dent) was in the movie purely for Joker to use. And, while odd, I can see the reasoning for the voice change. Batman was an alter ego for Bruce, so he changed his voice, perhaps to be more intimidating, perhaps to simply make it harder for he to be recongized as Bruce Wayne. And for that matter, Batman has always (going off cartoon series here) had that raspey voice, so it makes sense for him to do it in the movie. Dunno why you couldn't understand him though... And why do you think Joker & Batman needed a final battle? The Joker is not known as a brawler. he's a schemer who comes up with sinisater plans because he's just awesomely bored and that's what he chooses to do to stake off the boredom. If nothing else, the final battle between them was over morals and ethics, not physical might.And lastly, whhhyyyyy do you find Batman Begins to be so great? That's my problem. Why have him anyway? I don't mind him BECOMING Two-Face in the movie. But why did he have to do a whole bunch of stuff and then supposedly die AFTER he became two face? They could have said he escaped and that would have been that, wait for the next movie for him to REALLY do some bad s**t. I understand why he had the voice, and I agree with it, but...why did it have to be so bad? I can barely tell what he's saying sometimes, and in the beginning when he was yelling back to the impostors as he was getting back in the car, it sounded bad and out of character for Batman. They don't need a final fist fight. But they need a final moment of judgment, a deciding moment. Keep in mind, Joker is Batman's main enemy, and Joker is his slight superior in intellect. They're the perfect rivals, and everyone knows that. There needs to be a grand conflict of some sort. The way they showed it is that Joker gets caught, gets out, and gets caught again. Despite his smarts, he's not very good at eluding the law, now is he? Batman Begins was a great movie simply because it did a lot of stuff I didn't expect. Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul are two villains that you wouldn't expect to see as main antagonists in a Batman movie, simply because they're not as well-known as Joker or Two-Face. Plus the whole concept with Henri Ducard was, while cliche, surprising to someone who's not too familiar with Ra's Al Ghul (namely me). I was thinking today, if I had remembered what Ra's Al Ghul had looked like, I probably could have placed Ducard as him from the beginning. It basically did a great job of introducing Batman to a new audience. Xera: He's extremely smart, he's extremely dangerous, he's extremely cruel. In the comic books he beat Robin to death with a crowbar. In the series he created a device that rewrote Tim Drake's DNA that changed him into a Mini-joker. I'm not nitpicking for no reason, I'm not worrying about the fact that Two-Face and Venom are villains of different magnitudes, the point is that they're both villains who could have scored themselves places as main antagonists in the sequel to Dark Knight and Spider Man 4, but instead were crammed in there and drew the movie out, and taking away a lot of the characters' defining attributes. For example, Venom's bulging muscles and deep, nasty voice, as well as Two-Face's darkness and mysteriousness. Instead Two-Face seemed kinda like "WE'RE HERE! WE'RE QUEER ANGRY, WE'RE GONNA KILL SOME SUMBITCHES!" In Venom's case especially, he just seemed kind of rushed. As I said before Venom is a prime villain in the Spider-Man Comics, and the Animated series. Two-Face isn't. That was Batman Beyond, that's a side note. Also Scarecrow is meh villain and so is Mr....Karate guy? Also Two-Face in the next movie should be facing off Scarface in a mob war. Since Two-Face was never actually presumed to be dead. They thought he was dead. They didn't say "He's DEAD!" The casket could of been Rachel. And I'll say it once more, in Spider-Man there are three main Villains: The Kingpin, Green Goblin, and Venom. In Batman it's : Joker, Penguin and Freeze and probably Strange.Nope, there's a reason why Batman has a Rogues Gallery, he doesn't have a primary villain. Two-Face, Joker, Poison Ivy, Mr. Freeze, Ras Al Ghul, Scarecrow, Penguin, Clayface, Riddler, Catwoman, and villains like that are all part of that gallery. Joker is a major villain, but each one takes on a part of Batman that the other cannot. Hugo Strange isn't even part of the Rogues Gallery. Oh makes..sense. Guess you caught me there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:43 pm
The casket could've been empty..
I agree. Two Face's mini rampage felt like it was a bit rushed. They really could've done more with him.
And I wonder where Alfred went. ninja
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:20 am
Hey...STOP BEING SO HOPEFUL ABOUT HARVEY. First off, there is no clear evidence that they covered up ANYTHING other than the murders. IF Two Face was dead, they wouldn't care about his face because everyone knew that he was in an explosion. The cover up was his IMAGE, the fact that this Harvey Dent was built up as the White Knight of Gotham. Looking at Batman's perspective, he's playing the bad guy like a scapegoat so that that image is preserved, as Batman's intent is to save Gotham from corruption. Making your hero the the most wanted man in Gotham makes the story much darker (the intent). Turning around in a third movie and saying "SURPRISE! He lives!" would only complicate the story and ruin the end of The Dark Knight, as Gotham would definitely realize that Harvey Dent was the one who went on the killing spree, releasing all the criminals from custody, making Batman's role clear as mud, and really making Two Face pure evil, when he would be better off stuck in a limbo of decisions.
Okay, and I do recognize that it could be easier to bring back Two Face, but I think it will be very difficult, and would rob the writers of a chance to explore other Batman villains in a darker light, which did great things for the Joker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:32 am
All right, I have one more addition to the "Harvey Dent: Alive or Dead" discussion. While Two Face is a good villain, and haD potential to be a great villain, think about this....
There are some Harry Potter fans who like to write fanfiction in which Sirius Black is alive, as I'm sure such exists for Dumbledore as well. The truth? They're both dead. They had to die to further the story.
Star Wars fans love Boba Fett, and I know that some people would like Boba to have survived Return of the Jedi. The truth? He's dead. Get over it.
I was with my first girlfriend around the time that Stargate SG-1 killed Daniel Jackson. In true fangirl form, she immediately jumped to fanfic where he was alive (he did eventually come back to life, but that's a different story).
My point is, you can't have everything you want about a story. Changing one character can ruin the rest of the story, and the writers will do what they need to do in order to make the WHOLE story good. If you want to prove me wrong, go see Cranked 2. For those of you who don't know, Jason Statham's character died at the end of the first, but it turns out that he's going to somehow come back to life in the second. My prediction? the movie will be an epic failure. However, I have been wrong before.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:23 am
l -Xera- l The Dark -The Gray Legend- l -Xera- l The Dark -The Gray Legend- Sakyh -The Gray Legend- Wow...that movie scores with me a whopping "Meh"! I know I'm gonna get hate for this, but the first half was boring and convoluded, and Two-Face seemed to have a "Venom Factor" to him, meaning he was a character who was brought in at the middle to end of the movie who had all the potential to be a major villain and better developed in the next movie, but instead just draws out the movie longer than it needs to be and is killed off, unfortunately. Similar to Venom in Spider Man 3. Also, what IS it with writers putting in two or three villains in one movie? It just gets complicated. I did like Joker's character, but the problem with him is that he never really did anything Joker-ish. He did a lot of things that really just makes him a thug wearing face paint. The Joker is SO much smarter and so much more sinister than to just make people choose if they want to blow other people up. Plus there was no real final battle between Joker and Batman, which it seemed like the trailers were playing up to. But since Joker's not dead, perhaps they're saving it for the next movie. One last thing: why is it that I can never tell what Batman is saying? Christian Bale works as Bruce, but when he speaks as Batman, it's impossible to hear what he's saying because his affected voice is really, really...terrible. I'm sure that conversation at the end between Gordon and Batman was super important, but I had no idea what he was saying and therefore didn't know what the conversation was about. Yes, I'm nitpicking, and yes, it's probably just sheer disappointment from how built up it was from advertisement and hype, as well as how awesome Batman Begins was, but...definitely not happy with it. Seeing it again Tuesday though (I didn't arrange it, my mom did), maybe some things I missed I can catch the second time. For the last time who said Two-Face actually died in the movie? The casket was closed. granted, two face COULD have been in it. But just as easily not be. Iot was more of a side origin story for Two-Face. And he was in NO way EVER the big baddie of the movie. Joker was the adversary in the movie from minute 1 to minute 120. Legend that wasn't entirely pointed at you. I've been hearing some people moaning about that. And eh, I though Batman Begins sucked. And yeah, you'll get flamed buddy, but hey, everyone's bound to have different opinions. And unlike jackass fanboys, you have actual reasoning behind it. But really, I don't think he fell into the category of venom failure. Venom was pumped up as the main baddie in Spider Man 3, but they sucked out his glory and reduced it to a 30 minute camio. The JOKER was what this movie hyped as their baddie, not Two-Face. The Joker simply used Harvey as his pawn in his grand scheme, and Two-Face was the end result. Meaning that Two-Face (and therefor Harvey Dent) was in the movie purely for Joker to use. And, while odd, I can see the reasoning for the voice change. Batman was an alter ego for Bruce, so he changed his voice, perhaps to be more intimidating, perhaps to simply make it harder for he to be recongized as Bruce Wayne. And for that matter, Batman has always (going off cartoon series here) had that raspey voice, so it makes sense for him to do it in the movie. Dunno why you couldn't understand him though... And why do you think Joker & Batman needed a final battle? The Joker is not known as a brawler. he's a schemer who comes up with sinisater plans because he's just awesomely bored and that's what he chooses to do to stake off the boredom. If nothing else, the final battle between them was over morals and ethics, not physical might.And lastly, whhhyyyyy do you find Batman Begins to be so great? That's my problem. Why have him anyway? I don't mind him BECOMING Two-Face in the movie. But why did he have to do a whole bunch of stuff and then supposedly die AFTER he became two face? They could have said he escaped and that would have been that, wait for the next movie for him to REALLY do some bad s**t. I understand why he had the voice, and I agree with it, but...why did it have to be so bad? I can barely tell what he's saying sometimes, and in the beginning when he was yelling back to the impostors as he was getting back in the car, it sounded bad and out of character for Batman. They don't need a final fist fight. But they need a final moment of judgment, a deciding moment. Keep in mind, Joker is Batman's main enemy, and Joker is his slight superior in intellect. They're the perfect rivals, and everyone knows that. There needs to be a grand conflict of some sort. The way they showed it is that Joker gets caught, gets out, and gets caught again. Despite his smarts, he's not very good at eluding the law, now is he? Batman Begins was a great movie simply because it did a lot of stuff I didn't expect. Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul are two villains that you wouldn't expect to see as main antagonists in a Batman movie, simply because they're not as well-known as Joker or Two-Face. Plus the whole concept with Henri Ducard was, while cliche, surprising to someone who's not too familiar with Ra's Al Ghul (namely me). I was thinking today, if I had remembered what Ra's Al Ghul had looked like, I probably could have placed Ducard as him from the beginning. It basically did a great job of introducing Batman to a new audience. Xera: He's extremely smart, he's extremely dangerous, he's extremely cruel. In the comic books he beat Robin to death with a crowbar. In the series he created a device that rewrote Tim Drake's DNA that changed him into a Mini-joker. I'm not nitpicking for no reason, I'm not worrying about the fact that Two-Face and Venom are villains of different magnitudes, the point is that they're both villains who could have scored themselves places as main antagonists in the sequel to Dark Knight and Spider Man 4, but instead were crammed in there and drew the movie out, and taking away a lot of the characters' defining attributes. For example, Venom's bulging muscles and deep, nasty voice, as well as Two-Face's darkness and mysteriousness. Instead Two-Face seemed kinda like "WE'RE HERE! WE'RE QUEER ANGRY, WE'RE GONNA KILL SOME SUMBITCHES!" In Venom's case especially, he just seemed kind of rushed. As I said before Venom is a prime villain in the Spider-Man Comics, and the Animated series. Two-Face isn't. That was Batman Beyond, that's a side note. Also Scarecrow is meh villain and so is Mr....Karate guy? Also Two-Face in the next movie should be facing off Scarface in a mob war. Since Two-Face was never actually presumed to be dead. They thought he was dead. They didn't say "He's DEAD!" The casket could of been Rachel. And I'll say it once more, in Spider-Man there are three main Villains: The Kingpin, Green Goblin, and Venom. In Batman it's : Joker, Penguin and Freeze and probably Strange. I don't think I've read a stupider sentence in my life. At the funeral there was a picture of Harvey, and Comissioner Gordon's words were obviously about Harvey. It doesn't matter what kind of villains they are, you're not getting my point. The fact is they could have supported a whole movie BY THEMSELVES, but instead were crammed in with villains who got much more screen time and a lot of plot development that could have happened with them was nonexistent. I don't just mean origins. I mean after the fact as well. Sure, they went into Two-Face's origins, but after that, what? He shot a few people and threatened' Gordon's family. He could have done a lot more. You said yourself he and Scarface could have got in a mob battle. Maybe because it was a PR move? Dude they didn't announced he was dead in the first place.
He might of gotten a few broken bones and ribs. However he might of meant the DA was dead and Two-Face still lives. You don't know what happened, stop assuming what happened. Only Noel knows. That's what I'm getting at. What I said before was that the funeral was for him. It couldn't be for Rachel, that's a really far-fetched assumption.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:26 am
Priest_of_Syrinx All right, I have one more addition to the "Harvey Dent: Alive or Dead" discussion. While Two Face is a good villain, and haD potential to be a great villain, think about this.... There are some Harry Potter fans who like to write fanfiction in which Sirius Black is alive, as I'm sure such exists for Dumbledore as well. The truth? They're both dead. They had to die to further the story. Star Wars fans love Boba Fett, and I know that some people would like Boba to have survived Return of the Jedi. The truth? He's dead. Get over it. I was with my first girlfriend around the time that Stargate SG-1 killed Daniel Jackson. In true fangirl form, she immediately jumped to fanfic where he was alive (he did eventually come back to life, but that's a different story). My point is, you can't have everything you want about a story. Changing one character can ruin the rest of the story, and the writers will do what they need to do in order to make the WHOLE story good. If you want to prove me wrong, go see Cranked 2. For those of you who don't know, Jason Statham's character died at the end of the first, but it turns out that he's going to somehow come back to life in the second. My prediction? the movie will be an epic failure. However, I have been wrong before. Maybe the sequel is a prequel. biggrin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:34 am
-The Gray Legend- Priest_of_Syrinx All right, I have one more addition to the "Harvey Dent: Alive or Dead" discussion. While Two Face is a good villain, and haD potential to be a great villain, think about this.... There are some Harry Potter fans who like to write fanfiction in which Sirius Black is alive, as I'm sure such exists for Dumbledore as well. The truth? They're both dead. They had to die to further the story. Star Wars fans love Boba Fett, and I know that some people would like Boba to have survived Return of the Jedi. The truth? He's dead. Get over it. I was with my first girlfriend around the time that Stargate SG-1 killed Daniel Jackson. In true fangirl form, she immediately jumped to fanfic where he was alive (he did eventually come back to life, but that's a different story). My point is, you can't have everything you want about a story. Changing one character can ruin the rest of the story, and the writers will do what they need to do in order to make the WHOLE story good. If you want to prove me wrong, go see Cranked 2. For those of you who don't know, Jason Statham's character died at the end of the first, but it turns out that he's going to somehow come back to life in the second. My prediction? the movie will be an epic failure. However, I have been wrong before. Maybe the sequel is a prequel. biggrin EDIT: (ignore previous statement), but NO. Cranked 2 is supposed to be a true sequel, where Jason Statham has some sort of robotic heart or some s**t like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 6:48 am
Nter The casket could've been empty.. I agree. Two Face's mini rampage felt like it was a bit rushed. They really could've done more with him. And I wonder where Alfred went. ninja the casket being empty would be a good way to get everyone to like batman again. but i'm sure Gordon would not be that stupid and let two face live when they are trying to keep the image of the whight knight going. two face could shatter that in a few seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:10 pm
Hey guys, I just got back from my second time watching TDK, and Dent is definitely dead. Batman had a longer fall earlier that he survived from, so considering the possibility of taking many falls, Batman would be able to survive, but Harvey Dent would not. On top of that, there is NO indication that Dent would have survived. NO casket is shown, and Gordon is CLEARLY at a memorial for Harvey.
Sorry if this upsets anyone, but Harvey Dent will not be returning if a third movie is made.
PS
I had to check the end of the credits, and there is nothing. If they decided that Harvey was going to survive and get hidden or something, I would have expected them to give just a little hint for people who stayed through the credits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 5:47 pm
Priest_of_Syrinx I had to check the end of the credits, and there is nothing. If they decided that Harvey was going to survive and get hidden or something, I would have expected them to give just a little hint for people who stayed through the credits. Arvis_Jaggamar There is nothing after the credits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
