ReZourceman Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 Holy shit you're kidding. Fucking stupid bitch. I woulda slapped her. That kid might be tormented well into his life now. Silly silly woman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan_Dare Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Jesus, a 6 year old at THIS? fucking morons! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maase Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 What a bitc*... But yeah, i think its a bit too extreme, in my cinema, three kids left the cinema because of the Hunged "Batman"... And speaking of Hunged "Batman", didn't anyone else freak out for this part? This one was pure awesome, they were like talking and then BUM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan_Dare Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 loved that bit. (Hanged, for future reference) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maase Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 They were like talking about something (forgot what it was), i was listening to it, the guy goes to the Window... ARGH!!! I shat bricks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReZourceman Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 Oh yeah, scared the absolute beejesus girl outta me. Probably maybe not jumped that much at a cinema actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maase Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 I just made a clearly "WOW..." without noticing, one guy behind me said "Shhhh", grrr, i didn't do it on purpose, jackass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paj! Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 I jumped out my seat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEVILMURRAY Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Why does it matter what his "origin" is? It's not like he has any super-human powers. Most super power origins normally are snap things, being bitten by a spider = bam. Mental shit and scars, much more attractive to know/watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paj! Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Most super power origins normally are snap things, being bitten by a spider = bam. Mental shit and scars, much more attractive to know/watch. Maybe. Far more integral is the fact he has no shown origin, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Just some more Batman 3 talk: http://uk.movies.ign.com/articles/897/897308p1.html Batman 3 Babbling Goyer, comics scribes chime in on the villains. Even though there is no Batman 3 currently in development, that hasn't stopped speculation and rumors from running rampant about which characters might terrorize Gotham City in a potential third installment. David Goyer, who co-wrote the script for Batman Begins and developed the story for The Dark Knight with director Christopher Nolan, suggested to SCI FI Wire that the villains in the next film might not be household names. "There's no reason why we necessarily have to use the same three or four that are still around," Goyer said. "I mean, Batman's got a wide variety, [a] rogues' gallery. Certainly we used two in the first movie that hadn't been in the films before." MTV asked a number of prominent comic book writers and execs who they think should be the villain in Batman 3. For example, DC Comics Executive Editor Dan DiDio suggested Professor Hugo Strange. He added, "Characters like Catwoman, Riddler, and Hugo Strange make sense, because they're counterpoints to Batman's psychosis and fears. The Joker creates chaos. Two-Face shows the duality of the Batman-Bruce Wayne relationship, and how Batman's found peace with that duality. Batman searches for answers, and the Riddler has questions. Batman is driven, and Catwoman is sexual. They play well against each other and challenge aspects of what makes a hero." 30 Days of Night creator Steve Niles said, "I'd like to see Catwoman over the Penguin. Not as a prostitute, and not as the Tim Burton version — what, cats sniffed her back to life? — but perhaps the Adam Hughes design, with the goggles. That's very realistic. I can imagine her in street clothes that are designed just right. I also like the idea of them creating villains just for the movies." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEVILMURRAY Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 Maybe. Far more integral is the fact he has no shown origin, though. Which is why it matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Would just like to say that there are many people who didnt pick up on the fact that the joker lied about rachel's position. About Katie Holmes not doing the sequel, not sure if u guys have been living under a rock or not. But the film was shot the best part of 12 months ago, Mrs Cruise has a new-born to look after (lets not get onto a "shes whipped by tom" arguement, any good mother wouldnt have done the sequel at that time). Jack Nicholson is irked with The Dark Knight. Oscar winner Jack Nicholson, who played the Joker in Tim Burton's 1989 blockbuster Batman, expressed his disappointment about the film to MTV.com. "They never asked me about a sequel with the Joker. I know how to do that! Nobody ever asked me," Nicholson said. "It's like, in any area, you can't believe the reasons things do or don't happen. Not asking me how to do the sequel is that kind of thing. Maybe it's not a mistake. Maybe it was the right thing, but to be candid, I'm furious." The superstar added, "I'm not inclined to watch (The Dark Knight) because of what I said. But if it's a good movie, I'll catch up with it somewhere." Thirdly, anyone who takes nicholson's comments seriously here is clearly missing who jack nicholos really is "I know how to do that!", classic nicholson hahaha. Saying he isnt inclined to watch it is in a way (if you understand nicholsons warped self) taken out of context. You simply cannot argue who was a better joker, since both roles were DECADES apart (in both years, and depiction) Fourthly (:P) there were some parents in the cinema i watched the movie with children under 5 years old, that is seriously fucked up =/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paj! Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 You simply cannot argue who was a better joker, since both roles were DECADES apart (in both years, and depiction) Yeah but Heath Ledger was better at being The Joker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maase Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 There's no possible comparison between the two different jokers... Because Heath Ledger is MUCH better :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shorty Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 You simply cannot argue who was a better joker, since both roles were DECADES apart (in both years, and depiction) This is nonsense. The distance in time has no logical effect on whether or not you can argue who is better. I don't understand why people are so desperate to claim it is somehow 'impossible' to argue favourites just because one was ages ago. You argue taking into account the time that it took place. For example: I can say, despite the gap, that the Mega-Drive was much better than the Saturn, because it was cheaper, more successful and had some really killer games like Sonic 2, Streets of Rage and Shinobi. Or that Christopher Reeve played a better Superman than Dean Cain because he was more confident and bold as an actor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEVILMURRAY Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Dean Cain shat on Reeve. And Cesar Romano was the best Joker. Deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 This is nonsense. The distance in time has no logical effect on whether or not you can argue who is better.Yeah exactly! IMO Ledger was the better Joker, I can say that, I have, end of for me! I think Jack Nicholson was totally serious when he said those comments, I think they are idiotic and I'm glad he was upstaged! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 This is nonsense. The distance in time has no logical effect on whether or not you can argue who is better. I don't understand why people are so desperate to claim it is somehow 'impossible' to argue favourites just because one was ages ago. You argue taking into account the time that it took place. For example: I can say, despite the gap, that the Mega-Drive was much better than the Saturn, because it was cheaper, more successful and had some really killer games like Sonic 2, Streets of Rage and Shinobi. Or that Christopher Reeve played a better Superman than Dean Kane because he was more confident and bold as an actor. Before I start.. I dont like the word 'arguement', or you referring to my opinion as 'nonsense' What I said wasnt supposed to directly say that YOU cannot think this way, just simply a (poor) choice of words to express my opinion on the matter. You can say that the mega-drive was better than the saturn, but at the end of the day ur opinion is bias because u prefer the games on the mega-drive (not going to get into a debate about inflation affecting the prices etc!). I am sure there are people out there who actually prefer the Saturn due to it's games (crazy-taxi, ohhh man!), or technology. But I would tend to agree with the statement that one is not better than the other. Each have their pros and cons. Your tastes simply cannot be a matter of fact! It's that reasoning that makes me say that you can't argue that one joker was better than the other. Sure you can prefer one over the other, that is a matter of taste. I prefer Nicholson because hes the joker i grew up with and i love the presense he had in that movie, but that is simply a matter of opinion. Perhaps it also iritates me a little that Ledger was obviously influenced by nicholsons joker, and no credit is given to him. I fall short of saying that he was BETTER than ledger, because ledger's performance was simply brilliant. Both jokers played an imperitive roll in the movie they were in, and neither joker would fit in to the others' movie. Therefore i dont feel one did a better job than the other, they both performed their roles brilliantly. I think that is a fair enough statement. but again, at the end of the day it is simply a statement of my opinion, which you may use as a point for further discussion in the thread. Im not going to argue that my opinion is more right than someone else's in this kind of subject matter! As for time not making a difference at all Are u quite sure your opinion of nicholson's joker wouldnt change at all if his story wasnt enhanced by the special effects that are available today for ledger's joker? This is what i meant by decades apart in time (its quite literally near 20 years). I think that played at least some small part in each jokers' character. At least, that is simply my opinion In short, arguing on the internet is pointless. Instead what makes forums interesting is discussion of opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shorty Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 I'm not saying that I'm right, or that my opinions or taste are a matter of fact, I simply don't think you can state "you cannot argue" due to a time gap. Sorry if "nonsense" sounded a bit harsh, but it sounded like you were simply saying that there is no room for discussion. That the two most recent Jokers are somehow incompatible as opposing tastes because their context separates them somehow. Perhaps you see "argue" and "discuss" as very different concepts, but I guess I don't. If you are rational and open minded when having an argument, it is the same thing. Edit: you are going to go and say "Shorty" in the "People who need to be punched" thread now, aren't you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paj! Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Perhaps it also iritates me a little that Ledger was obviously influenced by nicholsons joker, and no credit is given to him. However, I would never try and argue that my opinion is more right than someone elses in this kind of subject matter. In what way? I highly doubt Nolan would recommend being inspired by the more "entertainment" type Batman films of the 80's and 90's. LEdger read The Killing Joke and The Long Hallowe'en to get into Joker, and probably a lot more comics. Nicholson just did an updated version of the 60's Joker, which he did well, making it a bit more scary. But he wasn't Joker, to me. I know it sounds superficial, but he was too bulky to be Joker for me. That combined with the fact that he didn't really get into the psychosis of Joker, who he is blah blah, made him weaker than Ledger. EDIT: I think my favourite (not the best) Joker on film is Mark Hamill's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 In what way? Perhaps i too am being superficial.. The way he does the sucking thing with his toungue, or the way he acts when explosions he is resposible for are going off around him for example. Now that i think about it a little more, these possibly arent things he directly got from nicholson but even still, I like the way which nicholson did them "first". I'm not saying that I'm right, or that my opinions or taste are a matter of fact, I simply don't think you can state "you cannot argue" due to a time gap. Sorry if "nonsense" sounded a bit harsh, but it sounded like you were simply saying that there is no room for discussion. I can see how u came to that conclusion from my poor choice of wording Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Perhaps it also iritates me a little that Ledger was obviously influenced by nicholsons joker, and no credit is given to him. I fall short of saying that he was BETTER than ledger, because ledger's performance was simply brilliant.I don't think that could be further from the truth.Whilst Ledger undoubtedly watched Nicholsons performance as part of his research, you can tell he delved FAR deeper into the character! Watch this montage of the two performances... Ledger is BY FAR the better Joker. To me Nicholsons Joker is just Nicholson in make-up! Ledger actually became the joker, it's outstanding, he's got a whole character, a performance answer to anything and everything. I think one of my favourite Ledger scenes whilst watching the movie, was perhaps surprisingly, the one when he's in the stollen cop car hanging his head out the window in the breeze. At that point I just thought, wow this is incredible, he is the joker! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEVILMURRAY Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 In what way? I highly doubt Nolan would recommend being inspired by the more "entertainment" type Batman films of the 80's and 90's. LEdger read The Killing Joke and The Long Hallowe'en to get into Joker, and probably a lot more comics. I thought he said he didn't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 I went to see this movie today, it was a long overdue outing. It is an excellent film. I hope thats not the last of 2face... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts