• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

The Dark Knight SPOILER THREAD

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wiggum2007 said:
So in the final confrontation, why the fuck doesn't Harvey shoot Batman in the face?
Click to expand...

He's the goddamn district attorney, not fucking Wyatt Earp. You think the White Knight of Gotham really has a lot of practice shooting people in the head from over ten feet? Wake up, smartass.
 
Skiptastic said:
He's the goddamn district attorney, not fucking Wyatt Earp. You think the White Knight of Gotham really has a lot of practice shooting people in the head from over ten feet? Wake up, smartass.
Click to expand...

You're a bully
 
Wiggum2007 said:
So he should've shot him in the mouth.
Click to expand...

Dent isn't an expert marksman. By the time he lined up for a shot, Batman would've planned out his plan of attack.

He probably thought, "If he misses, I'm going to dash towards him and perform a painful disarm."
 
RyuHayate said:
Dent isn't an expert marksman. By the time he lined up for a shot, Batman would've planned out his plan of attack.

He probably thought, "If he misses, I'm going to dash towards him and perform a painful disarm."
Click to expand...

Yea I was mostly kidding with that second part, your first reply seems like a reasonable enough explanation. I just started thinking of Dumb & Dumber when I saw that scene and was hoping Gordon would be all like 'Batman.... what if he shot you in the face??'
 
I think the only problem I had in this movie was Batman's stiff, robotic fighting. Like you would see him pull his arm back and hold it there for half a second, before releasing it forward into a punch.
 
Did it show which side Harvey's coin toss landed in judging Batman? It seems like Harvey would've been more careful with the shot placement if he was trying to kill him; the coin might have dictated that Batman be spared, forcing Harvey to wound him instead with a gut shot. If he hadn't shot him, Batman would've interfered with the later judgment for sure.

That's a pretty big assumption on Harvey's case, though.
 
Wiggum2007 said:
So in the final confrontation, why the fuck doesn't Harvey shoot Batman in the face?
Click to expand...

Harvey had a ton of respect for Batman, but since he was now under the influence of his lesser half, and obedient to the coin he had to shoot him. I'm guessing he was at least trying to not shoot any critical areas while still adhering to his new found law. The coin never had a tarnished side before.
 
Scullibundo said:
I think the only problem I had in this movie was Batman's stiff, robotic fighting. Like you would see him pull his arm back and hold it there for half a second, before releasing it forward into a punch.
Click to expand...
He's just showing off. I heard about a deleted scene where, before hitting a henchman, he cocks back the five finger sandwich, pauses casually and says loudly "Oh wow, would you look at that...it's my fist!" before promptly dropping the sledgehammer on him.
 
SpeedingUptoStop said:
He's just showing off. I heard about a deleted scene where, before hitting a henchman, he cocks back the five finger sandwich, pauses casually and says loudly "Oh wow, would you look at that...it's my fist!" before promptly dropping the sledgehammer on him.
Click to expand...

No its this thing that happens in every fight scene. It's as if it was meant to be edited at a faster pace but because the complaints the first film got Nolan let it all happen in one take.
 
Scullibundo said:
No its this thing that happens in every fight scene. It's as if it was meant to be edited at a faster pace but because the complaints the first film got Nolan let it all happen in one take.
Click to expand...
I noticed it, but it just seemed deliberate to me. Like he was playing chess or something, working out the next hit before the first one was even started.
 
Scullibundo said:
No its this thing that happens in every fight scene. It's as if it was meant to be edited at a faster pace but because the complaints the first film got Nolan let it all happen in one take.
Click to expand...

It's really just the fighting style they used for Batman.
 
DMczaf said:
k37tvq.jpg
Click to expand...

DARK KNIGHT VS DARK KIGHT? WTF
 
Is the one of the left supposed to be a different Batman from the one on the right? Right one looks a lot fatter and older.
 
UltimaPooh said:
I think it is BEGINS on the right and Dark Knight on the left.
Click to expand...
Naw, the suits are the same, just the faces are different & the right guy's stomach is sticking out. Frank Miller Dark Knight movie confirmed?
 
If you look extra closely... you'll see that the belts are different. THe coloring is different for both suits, as wel as the head gear. The backs of the suits are different as well as the tops. The one on the right has his bat blades on his belt, the one on the left doesn't (The bat blades were really only used in BEGINS0 The left suit is form fitting as well, thus making it lighter and not as heavy.
 
Still no denying the chest plates are The Dark Knight suit. The pic does say before and after. Maybe the one on the right was just an earlier mock up of the doll on the left?
 
SpeedingUptoStop said:
Still no denying the chest plates are The Dark Knight suit. The pic does say before and after. Maybe the one on the right was just an earlier mock up of the doll on the left?
Click to expand...

Correct.

They fine tuned the figure for final release which is just a few days away.

Looks fab :D
 
as cool as they are, at the end of the day they are $100 dolls, which is treading on some Home Shopping Network porcelain doll territory that old ladies buy...which is pretty creepy.
 
Skiptastic said:
Just reading that article shows that he knows absolutely nothing about film. His movies only cement that opinion.
Click to expand...

Or how Robert Downey Jr. feels about DC to begin with...

Plus, Joker doesn't need his own film. The main reason why I loved his role in TDK was because nothing was known about him and whatever we thought we knew was thrown out the window every time he discussed the story behind his scars.

He's a lovable bullshitter!
 
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i6d1955ff988810b854a0d3c99fd8e7ef

Warner Bros. is upping the ante in the awards-season screener game by going Blu-ray, and Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight" could be the big beneficiary.

The studio has sent out a mailer to Academy members, offering them the option of receiving screeners in the Blu-ray format in lieu of watermarked regular DVDs. Nolan, a proponent of Blu-ray, urged the studio to make history with the foray into new technology.

"We really tried to do a lot with the film technically to give audiences a real reason to go see the film in theaters," including shooting sequences in large-format Imax, the "Dark Knight" director said in an interview.

But for Academy members who haven't seen it in theaters, or simply want to view it again, he said, "the Blu-ray version is vastly superior to DVD. You can actually see the things we did in Imax, and it will give Academy members the best possible chance to see what we did technically."
Click to expand...

For "Knight's" Blu-ray incarnation, the director said he was able to approximate the changing aspect ratios of the film's Imax edition. The sections shot in 35mm will play in a letterboxed format, and for the Imax sequences, the image will expand to fill the entire widescreen. While that doesn't capture the complete Imax image, "it still gives us more of the way it was projected in Imax," Nolan said.

Warners will be holding the usual awards-season screenings of the movie, and the film will be rereleased theatrically in January, but Nolan said that if Oscar voters can't make those, "the Blu-ray version is also an excellent way to see the film."
Click to expand...
 
This is probably a dumb question, but as someone who has a blu-ray player (PS3) and but no HDTV, would the Blu-ray version look distorted at all on my SD set? Or should I just stick with the regular DVD?
 
Christopher said:
Awesome I know this is gonna be big for Blu Ray too if WB pimps it so
Click to expand...

The highest grossing movie of the year?
Second of all time?
You think WB REALLY needs to pimp it for people to buy?

Hell, wouldn't be surprised if folks here buy multiple copies.
 
The sections shot in 35mm will play in a letterboxed format, and for the Imax sequences, the image will expand to fill the entire widescreen. While that doesn't capture the complete Imax image, "it still gives us more of the way it was projected in Imax
Click to expand...

Wait, so in the Imax version, does the aspect ration change through out the film?

And it will do the same on Blu Ray?

That's how I read it.
 
For "Knight's" Blu-ray incarnation, the director said he was able to approximate the changing aspect ratios of the film's Imax edition. The sections shot in 35mm will play in a letterboxed format, and for the Imax sequences, the image will expand to fill the entire widescreen. While that doesn't capture the complete Imax image, "it still gives us more of the way it was projected in Imax," Nolan said.
Click to expand...

...oh dear I hope there's an option to watch it "normally". although this is kinda interesting...

Blader5489 said:
This is probably a dumb question, but as someone who has a blu-ray player (PS3) and but no HDTV, would the Blu-ray version look distorted at all on my SD set? Or should I just stick with the regular DVD?
Click to expand...

It'll look like the best goddamn DVD ever on a SDTV. :P No reason to go DVD if you got a PS3.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Alien Earth Open Spoiler Thread
14 15 16 17 18
868
9K
Trilobit replied
Good dark fantasy animes along the lines of Berserk?
34
2K
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt replied
In the Dark Knight Franchise: Does Bruce have any defense against embezzlement (spoilers for the Dark Knight series)
17
2K
Raven117 replied
A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms trailer (Game of Thrones spinoff)
2
59
1K
AJUMP23 replied
2025 | The yearly positive thread
3
247
DKehoe replied
Top Bottom