The Dark Knight

[yangfeili]

I've concluded that, I'm one of the few people that thought the Joker was friggin hilarious.

Everyone in the theatre I was at found the Joker pretty darned funny, but maybe us Midwesterners just have a twisted sense of humor (most likely inherited from our ancestors who learned to look at the funny side of things when oxen drowned in rivers and children died from scarlet fever and you could only carry back 100 pounds of meat from that 2000 pound buffalo).

[Bleck]

I thought The Joker was funny.

[Lotd2242]

and harvey dent being shipped out of a hospital to one in a different city for no apparent reason right before it's blown up isn't a convenient coincidence

What do you mean no apparent reason? First there's the fact that he's the highest-value target in Gotham. They'd get him out as soon as he was stable, if for no other reason than to keep the Joker from targeting the hospital (ironic, isn't it?) And if they were stupid enough to keep him there, which they were, as soon as the Joker called in the threat on the hospitals, he would've been the first one out. They would've put him in the nearest Medivac chopper and flown him out of the city before a single civilian got out the door. None of this leaving one inept guard to get killed nonsense.

Edit: I also thought the joker was funny.

[Bleck]

First there's the fact that he's the highest-value target in Gotham. They'd get him out as soon as he was stable, if for no other reason than to keep the Joker from targeting the hospital (ironic, isn't it?)

The Joker was in prison, there was no reason to suspect anything else happening

And if they were stupid enough to keep him there, which they were, as soon as the Joker called in the threat on the hospitals, he would've been the first one out. They would've put him in the nearest Medivac chopper and flown him out of the city before a single civilian got out the door.

people can't just up and say hey we're bringing this dude to your hospital so uh leave a room open k? that is just silly there is procedure involved in these kind of things, procedure that takes more than - what was the time span in that part of the movie? less than 24 hours? sounds about right yeah

None of this leaving one inept guard to get killed nonsense.

The Joker is still an unarmed man; the cops had every reason to assume that a man with a gun was enough to watch him, just like in real life

[JCvgluvr]

Okay, now I've seen this masterpiece twice, and it's making much more sense. Seeing the Joker cast as a sadistic, malevolent force, rather than just a mere super villain, has finally given me someone (bad) to look up to! It really is how he said it to the mobster: "Gotham needs a better class of villain, and I'm gonna give it to 'em!"

The action was great. The actors were near flawless (with Ledger being completely flawless), and the sound and music was highly praiseworthy. The Dark Knight is certainly the best movie of the year, and perhaps the best superhero movie ever (if I can ever push the original Spiderman out of my mind).

One question: Did the Joker lie to Batman to get him to go save Harvey, knowing that Batman would reflexively go after Rachael instead?

[Bleck]

Did the Joker lie to Batman to get him to go save Harvey, knowing that Batman would reflexively go after Rachael instead?

Yes. tencahcahca

[Poke'G]

SPOILERS

One last thing: why does Batman have to take the blame for the murders? Why don't they just blame it on Joker?

That and the fact that Batman apparently killed (is this now under debate?) Two-Face after the film made a big deal about Batman not killing were two big flaws in the ending. Part of that disappointment is probably due to the fact that earlier in the movie Batman threw the one mob leader off a building from an apparently similar height and lived.

I could be off on how big that warehouse drop was. Any of the multiple viewing people have feedback on that?

[Bleck]

after the film made a big deal about Batman not killing were two big flaws in the ending.

That entire scene is one of the points of the movie. Is it more important for Batman to let Two-Face kill the boy if it means keeping his code? There has to be a line for villains to cross' date=' and at that point Batman didn't really have any other choice.

Part of that disappointment is probably due to the fact that earlier in the movie Batman threw the one mob leader off a building from an apparently similar height and lived.

Sal Maroni landed on his legs; Two-Face landed on his spine.

[JH Sounds]

Did the Joker lie to Batman to get him to go save Harvey, knowing that Batman would reflexively go after Rachael instead?

I thought the point of that scene was that Batman felt the future of Gotham was more important than his feelings for Rachel.

[Vurez]

SPOILERS

I'm pretty sure the Joker gave them the opposite addresses so whoever Batman cared about most would die. The beauty of it is, he wouldn't have to know which one it was beforehand - just switching the addresses would suffice.

[sephfire]

Well, when asked who he's going after, he says "Rachel." And I thought I recalled him looking panicked when he arrived on the scene to find Dent there instead. Just another Joker mind-screw.

[Lotd2242]

The Joker was in prison, there was no reason to suspect anything else happening

I may be wrong about the exact timing, but he gets out during that whole sequence of Dent being torched doesn't he?

people can't just up and say hey we're bringing this dude to your hospital so uh leave a room open k? that is just silly there is procedure involved in these kind of things, procedure that takes more than - what was the time span in that part of the movie? less than 24 hours? sounds about right yeah

Absolutely they can. That's a couple of phone calls. Medivacs are supposed to be fast because if they're not, people die. The only real difficulty is making sure the receiving hospital will have adequate protection, and you can work on that during the flight out.

The Joker is still an unarmed man; the cops had every reason to assume that a man with a gun was enough to watch him, just like in real life

I think the Joker had consistently proven that he was resourceful enough to deal with one man with a gun handily. He had just broken out of a police precinct after all.

[Poke'G]

SPOILERS (although if you haven't seen it by now, it's kind of your own fault for coming in here)

That entire scene is one of the points of the movie. Is it more important for Batman to let Two-Face kill the boy if it means keeping his code? There has to be a line for villains to cross, and at that point Batman didn't really have any other choice.

Sal Maroni landed on his legs; Two-Face landed on his spine.

Two-Face methodically seeking out vengeance on single individuals crosses the line, but Joker causing rampant chaos and destruction while killing randomly in cold-blood doesn't?

Besides, Batman had gone out of the way to keep the villainous from dying, especially emphasized with the Joker. Since Batman saved Rachel after falling from a height far beyond Two-Face's (with enough force to cave in a car), the fact he didn't in a lesser fall felt.... contradictory. Knocking him off made perfect sense, but then not trying to keep him alive when we saw he could do it earlier? Not to mention Two-Face survived a car crash that supposedly killed Maroni.

If Nolan wanted a big deal over Batman killing someone, they didn't really play off of it in that scene. No "I tried". No "Oh God, Joker was right about me." Nothing, just "Joker caused just one of us to fall, the best of us. Blame me about those dead corrupt cops instead of the Joker, thereby screwing over our ability to work together in the future."

With all the great work they had put into the rest of the movie, the ending came off as lazy and without thought.

[Bleck]

Two-Face methodically seeking out vengeance on single individuals crosses the line' date=' but Joker causing rampant chaos and destruction while killing randomly in cold-blood doesn't?[/quote']

He had to choose between saving the boy and stopping Two-Face. Every other time, every other criminal, he could do both.

At that point, he had no other alternative.

[NNY]

Alright, for any of you doubting the death of Two Face, I'm just going to post what I posted at Something Awful. There are spoilers, but I think that's a given.

It really wasn't that high of a fall. TwoFace got knocked out and they carted him off to Arkham. Gordon is all about doing that secret stuff. The funeral was for the martyr Harvey Dent. TwoFace lives.

If this were the rationalization, then why did Batman have to take the blame for Harvey's actions? Why wouldn't they just blame it on Two Face? Even if Two Face was still alive, he'd just tell everyone the truth. His ego wouldn't allow Batman to take the credit for his actions. What happened when the cops arrived and chased Batman away? Did Gordon say "take Two Face to Arkham?" No. He would have said "Harvey Dent is was killed by Batman, along with a few other people."

As for Two Face falling from the height. People have been using the fact that Maroni living from his fall to rationalize Harvey being alive too. Maroni landed on his feet. He was upright during his fall, so all the damage from the fall was in his ankles. Two Face on the other hand was pushed off of the building, not upright at all. He's not an acrobat either, he wouldn't be able to position himself properly in that little time. We never got to see how he landed, but from the way he was pushed, it's best to assume his back, which could be broken, along with his neck.

Harvey Dent/Two Face, is dead. If he were alive, Batman taking the blame would be pointless. What could they do with Two Face if he were alive? Take him to Arkham? Tell him to be quiet? Put him in a "soundproof cell" as someone mentioned earlier? That's laughable. He'd be screaming his lungs out telling everyone the truth, cheapening Batman taking the blame. Logically, it doesn't work. This may be a comic book movie underneath it all, but it's the most cinematic, non-comic book movie of all. Had it been any other movie at all, there wouldn't be any doubt to his death at all. Everything had been wrapped up nice and tight. Harvey Dent died a hero to the citizens of Gotham, and unknowingly, lived (and then abruptly died) the villain.

That's actually two separate posts by myself, but it works the same.

Edit: And yes, he landed on his back.

[Poke'G]

He had to choose between saving the boy and stopping Two-Face. Every other time, every other criminal, he could do both.

At that point, he had no other alternative.

Apparently you didn't read the rest of that post.

Since Batman saved Rachel after falling from a height far beyond Two-Face's (with enough force to cave in a car)' date=' the fact he didn't in a lesser fall felt.... contradictory. Knocking him off made perfect sense, but then not trying to keep him alive when we saw he could do it earlier?[/quote']

I argue he could have done both easily and gave reasoning why.

[Lotd2242]

That Dent was targeting Gordon and his family instead of Batman was pretty weak in its own right.

[ILLiterate]

Spoilers yada yada

To people wondering why Batman saved Dent and not the girl, he wasn't trying to save Dent. Joker mixed up the addresses on purpose, it's a joke

Also, Batman just tackled Dent, he didn't mean to kill him or anything he just ended up falling. Also notice the coin landing face up, lucky side. Dent can still be alive or he can be dead, it's totally up to interpretation as of now

Batman doesn't kill, period, it doesn't matter what anyone does he will not kill under any circumstances

[Bleck]

Apparently you didn't read the rest of that post.

earlier in the movie he didn't kill the joker yadda yadda I read it

my point still stands - up until that point he did not have to take any drastic measures

I argue he could have done both easily and gave reasoning why.

yeah see the main difference here was at this point he was shot

That Dent was targeting Gordon and his family instead of Batman was pretty weak in its own right.

the bat saved his life, gordon did not save rachel in time

not to mention who knows whether or not he was going to go after batman afterwards

[Poke'G]

Also, Batman just tackled Dent, he didn't mean to kill him or anything he just ended up falling. Also notice the coin landing face up, lucky side. Dent can still be alive or he can be dead, it's totally up to interpretation as of now

I thought the coin was supposed to point out the pointlessness of the action taken, Dent died when the boy would have lived anyway.

The flip being for Dent is an interesting way to look at it. I hope he comes back, even if it's not likely. It felt like there was so much more they could do with Two-Face.

[Lotd2242]

yeah see the main difference here was at this point he was shot

Being shot didn't seem to affect him running off at the end.

the bat saved his life, gordon did not save rachel in time

not to mention who knows whether or not he was going to go after batman afterwards

The latter part is true of course.

But he didn't want the Bat to save his life. He wanted him to save Rachael's, which is why he's screaming the whole way out of the building that he should save her. He should be pissed that Batman saved him instead of Rachael. Also the whole situation only exists because of Batman.

That is not to say I don't understand how he decided to target Gordon, it does make sense in its own roundabout way. I'm just saying that it's a weaker story choice regardless. I think it would've been much more powerful if Dent was trying to kill Batman considering he spent the whole movie defending Batman. Not to mention taking an innocent family hostage is several steps removed from whacking out corrupt mobsters or targeting a vigilante crimefighter.

[Bleck]

Being shot didn't seem to affect him running off at the end.

no he was just stumbling around and falling into walls in pain because he's the goddamn batman

He should be pissed that Batman saved him instead of Rachael.

batman didn't really have time, the buldings exploded pretty much immediatement afterwards

Also the whole situation only exists because of Batman.

yeah this is true

[yangfeili]

That is not to say I don't understand how he decided to target Gordon, it does make sense in its own roundabout way.

His thing against Gordon was that he had repeatedly been trying to get Gordon to do something about internal corruption within the police force, and it was the corrupt cops who acted as the Joker's inside-men which eventually led to Rachael getting killed.

Oh, as for Batman killing Dent but not the Joker, I think it has something to do with the immediacy of the situation. Dent had a gun to the kid's head right then and there. It seems like most of the scenes where he directly encounters the Joker didn't involve that same sort of immediacy. Almost kind of like a police procedure thing with regards to deadly force: just because the suspect is wanted for murder doesn't mean you can just run out and kill him unless he's in the immediate act of murdering yet another victim.

[Lotd2242]

batman didn't really have time, the buldings exploded pretty much immediatement afterwards

Yeah, but as far as Dent knows, Batman chose to save him instead of Rachael, not that the Joker just flipped the addresses to mess with him, at least unless somebody tells him off-screen.

His thing against Gordon was that he had repeatedly been trying to get Gordon to do something about internal corruption within the police force, and it was the corrupt cops who acted as the Joker's inside-men which eventually led to Rachael getting killed.

I know. I just said I understood it.

But it's still very roundabout logic compared to the immediate connection all of the events had to Batman, particularly when Gordon had said repeatedly that he knew about the corrupt cops and was doing the best he could with what he had.

[DJMetal]

I am unfortunately not here to discuss the finer points of the movie, just to joygasm over it, because I'm a gross fanboy. I actually really really liked the movie despite all of the hype about Heath Ledger. I like Heath Ledger, don't get me wrong, but I think a lot of people went to see that movie because of him, and not because it was going to be good/batman/whatever. But I was pleased. It felt way different from the first movie though. Way more almost real-lifeish instead of far away and removed in Gotham. =D But wasn't nearly as good as "Batman and Robin", am I right?

DJ Metal