The Dark Knight Comprehensive IMAX prologue descriptions

The Batsignal is off when he does it, and it's during the day when it's cloudy and/or rainy.

I interpreted it as a PR move. Simply unplugging the signal doesn't really send a message, to Batman or to the public or whatever. Smashing the symbol to bits kiiiinda does.

Exactly. Gordon might be forced from "behind the scenes" to perform such a public display of "we don't condone vigilante justice!" and does this as some sort of PR stunt/media event, "to send a message".

His heart probably isn't in it, and I'm sure, in context, the scene will eventually make sense (maybe he calls Batman beforehand and say "hey, if you turn on channel 4 this afternoon, don't be pissed at what you see...I'm just doing it to get the mayor and the 'criminal's rights' crowd off my butt a bit; it's no reflection on how I feel about you...").

:woot:

Big city politics and all...

I figure by the time the events in this movie are going down, Batman and Gordon both realize they've really only got - and can trust - each other.
 
Man! You guys just don't remember the signal-smashing scene like I do!

It's like this: Jim Gordon standing with a bunch of cops on top of police HQ in the POURING RAIN! Rain makes it perfect. It's almost as if Batman betrayed him or something. It's like he's looking at the Signal with great disdain. He pulls the Axe up with his fists tightly gripped on the handle. -- CUT SCENE TO SOMETHING ELSE -- Back to Gordon -- BAM!!!!!!!!!! He smashes the signal right in the middle and rain floods the light tank! It's ****ing EPIC!!!!!!!!
 
Man! You guys just don't remember the signal-smashing scene like I do!

It's like this: Jim Gordon standing with a bunch of cops on top of police HQ in the POURING RAIN! Rain makes it perfect. It's almost as if Batman betrayed him or something. It's like he's looking at the Signal with great disdain. He pulls the Axe up with his fists tightly gripped on the handle. -- CUT SCENE TO SOMETHING ELSE -- Back to Gordon -- BAM!!!!!!!!!! He smashes the signal right in the middle and rain floods the light tank! It's ****ing EPIC!!!!!!!!

i didnt see disdain...it looked more like remorse. i really saw him looking really conflicted about it. im betting he's had his hand forced. but you're right, it was damn EPIC. i get the feeling this is going to be like...the godfather of superhero films.
 
im still kinda depressed about the batsignal getting smashed. i just dont like how that sounds. i like the batsignal.....
 
You hear people talk about the "epic scope" of this movie, but it doesn't really hit you until you see it on film.
 
i would say it sounds dramatic, but not "epic". braveheart is epic. LOTR's is epic. gordon smashing the batsignal...not epic.
 
Just a random thought, Im a philosophy major and I find this pretty interesting: Nietzsche says "Whatever doesn't kill me makes me stronger" and his philosophy can be said to revolve around an opposition between the Apollonian Rationalist and the Dionysian. Dionysus is the greek god of drunkenness, orgy, music, rapture, and also violence and chaos. This opposition interestingly pairs Batman(apollo) and the Joker(dionysus). im sure its not overtly conscious decision seeing as how i kinda doubt Bob Kane as a reader of Nietzsche (but you never know), but its interesting nonetheless to think of the Batman/Joker opposition in terms of mythology, how its evolved over time, and although we think we live in a secular world, we still have myths, only in the form of comics, graphic novels, all of which I feel are just as sophisticated as classical myth. They deal with age-old human problems and dualities, especially like the Rational/Irrational, essential/in-essential debates, its interesting to think that this debate continues on despite new forms, makes me appreciate the whole Batman universe a lot more...
 
Just a random thought, Im a philosophy major and I find this pretty interesting: Nietzsche says "Whatever doesn't kill me makes me stronger" and his philosophy can be said to revolve around an opposition between the Apollonian Rationalist and the Dionysian. Dionysus is the greek god of drunkenness, orgy, music, rapture, and also violence and chaos. This opposition interestingly pairs Batman(apollo) and the Joker(dionysus). im sure its not overtly conscious decision seeing as how i kinda doubt Bob Kane as a reader of Nietzsche (but you never know), but its interesting nonetheless to think of the Batman/Joker opposition in terms of mythology, how its evolved over time, and although we think we live in a secular world, we still have myths, only in the form of comics, graphic novels, all of which I feel are just as sophisticated as classical myth. They deal with age-old human problems and dualities, especially like the Rational/Irrational, essential/in-essential debates, its interesting to think that this debate continues on despite new forms, makes me appreciate the whole Batman universe a lot more...

....you're smart.

but seriously, i like this. i love when people think beyond "i like comics and batman is neat". it's so exciting.
 
i would say it sounds dramatic, but not "epic". braveheart is epic. LOTR's is epic. gordon smashing the batsignal...not epic.

When you see this thing, you will only describe it as epic.
 
im still kinda depressed about the batsignal getting smashed. i just dont like how that sounds. i like the batsignal.....

i love the batsignal as well, but the dramatic possibilities connected to it's destruction are just exciting the crap out of me. and its not just that shot giving me the epic feel...i mean..the entire prologue was just...flawlessly executed and just like...had that feel that a great movie has. scratch that, that feel a masterpiece has.
 
Epic is the only way you can describe this.
 
and so is everyone else, i just so happened to have taken a class about that stuff.

ah, im sorry, you didnt take that as a shot at you, did you? i meant it seriously! that post was really, really smart.
 
....you're smart.

but seriously, i like this. i love when people think beyond "i like comics and batman is neat". it's so exciting.

Batman is the only superhero that still sticks with me, im 21.
when it comes to graphic novels, I've moved onto guys like morrison that really take the self-awareness about the medium and run with it. but batman is one of those comics that possess the quality that...that american action films uniquely possess in my opinion. I also study psychoanalysis, and we had a recent class about desire and representation in film. American cinema has what is the classic example of the (im going to use vulgar pop psychology terms for sake of simplicity)ego/id opposition, that is between the 'cover story' and what the real 'libidinal investments' of the characters are, whats really going on behind the scenes. This opposition has a historical precedent, think of McCarthyism and hollywood Black listing. In order for artists to truly get across what they wanted to say was to tell it through a superficial medium, that is, by interweaving darker elements into standard narratives in order to elude censors. Back to comics: my parents think comics are silly, so do most adults and intellectuals. What they dont realize is that the same opposition is working. The medium itself is a cover story for expressing things in the american imaginary far deeper. Take Rambo...the cover story is basic action hero macho guy stuff, a level deeper and its about the crisis of the american masculine identity and its relationship to father figures and the alienation and dehumanizing horror of war. with Batman? just look at Harvey Dent. He represents exactly what the Law is, an absolute schism within itself. Just think about how a person like Batman, going out there with justice as his absolute ideal, refusing to murder, can be arrested because of the law. There are two sides to the law, it helps, but what it really is is a tool for the powerful and the corrupt. and if we want to go even deeper, lets take the eye of the beholder issue as Dent's origin. Look at how Bruce and Harvey are what they are because of their relationship to their fathers. both internally split because of something violent associated with their father figures. Look at what pop philosopher Zizek recently said: "...everybody's father is a figure who failed to live up to his mandate," everybody's father "left to his son the task to settle his symbolic debts."
 
Yeah, I'm sure it's a great scene. But honestly, how much does it mean in the "big picture" of things? It could be a throwaway scene for all we know. After all, it's just a spotlight with a bat shape in front of it. Easily replaceable, I'm sure.

So Gordon, under pressure from higher-ups and the public, has to do some "public gesture" or whatever. For all we know, this happens in the first half hour and doesn't even mean much in the overall story? Certainly a possibility, when you think how trailers are often edited and presented (think back over your own moviegoing experiences).

Besides, how hard would it be to build another by the movie's end? Cut a piece of metal, do a little welding, etc...voila, new bat signal. It isn't some irreplaceable, alien tech or material, after all. I hate to place too much importance and majesty on a big flashlight, and its destruction...

:oldrazz:

I'm curious to see how this scene is wrapped into the story, what it actually means, if it's as "epic" and grand as we assume, etc. These trailers are so often edited in ways that make small, simple scenes or dialogue seem so much more important than they are in the final product. After being burned a few dozen times by iconic, trailer-based "money scenes" rarely panning out in the final movie, I have a tough time thinking every cool scene in a trailer is as big and meaningful as it leads you to believe.

:yay:

I think he does it to get people off his butt, but another one is built (and used) before the end of the picture.
 
i would say it sounds dramatic, but not "epic". braveheart is epic. LOTR's is epic. gordon smashing the batsignal...not epic.

You know, 'epic' doesn't mean it has to have swords and battle scenes :oldrazz:.
 
Yeah, I'm sure it's a great scene. But honestly, how much does it mean in the "big picture" of things? It could be a throwaway scene for all we know. After all, it's just a spotlight with a bat shape in front of it. Easily replaceable, I'm sure.

So Gordon, under pressure from higher-ups and the public, has to do some "public gesture" or whatever. For all we know, this happens in the first half hour and doesn't even mean much in the overall story.

Besides, how hard would it be to build another by the movie's end? Cut a piece of steel, doing a little welding.

I hate to place too much importance and majesty on a big flashlight, and its destruction...

I'm curious to see how this scene is wrapped into the story, what it actually means, if it's as "epic" and grand as we assume, etc. These trailers are so often edited in ways that make small, simple scenes or dialogue seem so much more important than they are in the final product.

I think he does it to get people off his butt, but another one is built (and used) before the end of the picture...hardly a lingering tragedy.

:oldrazz:

It's symbolic, you fool :whatever: The Batsignal represents Batman's relationship with Gordon. It represents Gordon's faith in Batman and hope for the city of Gotham. It is a constant presence in the lore of The Dark Knight both in the comics and in the movies. I'm sorry, but having Gordon himself destroy it is a huge deal. Yes, even perhaps - epic.
 
Batman is the only superhero that still sticks with me, im 21.
when it comes to graphic novels, I've moved onto guys like morrison that really take the self-awareness about the medium and run with it. but batman is one of those comics that possess the quality that...that american action films uniquely possess in my opinion. I also study psychoanalysis, and we had a recent class about desire and representation in film. American cinema has what is the classic example of the (im going to use vulgar pop psychology terms for sake of simplicity)ego/id opposition, that is between the 'cover story' and what the real 'libidinal investments' of the characters are, whats really going on behind the scenes. This opposition has a historical precedent, think of McCarthyism and hollywood Black listing. In order for artists to truly get across what they wanted to say was to tell it through a superficial medium, that is, by interweaving darker elements into standard narratives in order to elude censors. Back to comics: my parents think comics are silly, so do most adults and intellectuals. What they dont realize is that the same opposition is working. The medium itself is a cover story for expressing things in the american imaginary far deeper. Take Rambo...the cover story is basic action hero macho guy stuff, a level deeper and its about the crisis of the american masculine identity and its relationship to father figures and the alienation and dehumanizing horror of war. with Batman? just look at Harvey Dent. He represents exactly what the Law is, an absolute schism within itself. Just think about how a person like Batman, going out there with justice as his absolute ideal, refusing to murder, can be arrested because of the law. There are two sides to the law, it helps, but what it really is is a tool for the powerful and the corrupt. and if we want to go even deeper, lets take the eye of the beholder issue as Dent's origin. Look at how Bruce and Harvey are what they are because of their relationship to their fathers. both internally split because of something violent associated with their father figures. Look at what pop philosopher Zizek recently said: "...everybody's father is a figure who failed to live up to his mandate," everybody's father "left to his son the task to settle his symbolic debts."

it's interesting, all this, because im actually reading a book on the history of batman right now, and there alot of similar points/ideas expressed by some of the beginning writers and artists. especially those from the 70's.

i think whats really exciting is that Nolan seems to be on the same wavelength as you, which is why this new series is so good.
 
It's symbolic, you fool :whatever: The Batsignal represents Batman's relationship with Gordon. It represents Gordon's faith in Batman and hope for the city of Gotham. It is a constant presence in the lore of The Dark Knight both in the comics and in the movies. I'm sorry, but having Gordon himself destroy it is a huge deal. Yes, even perhaps - epic.

PREACH IT! it is so not JUST a light. it's the BAT SIGNAL. think about it like this- you're a gotham citizen, used to living in constant fear. a man takes it upon himself to fix the situation, becoming a symbol of the goodness in the world you didnt think still existed. he might have even saved you at some point. just think about how big your heart swells every time you see that symbol in the sky. "ah, hell, honey, kids-look. its the goddamn bat signal. im getting misty..." now think about what it means to NOT see it there. its a HUGE DEAL.
 
Batman is the only superhero that still sticks with me, im 21.
when it comes to graphic novels, I've moved onto guys like morrison that really take the self-awareness about the medium and run with it. but batman is one of those comics that possess the quality that...that american action films uniquely possess in my opinion. I also study psychoanalysis, and we had a recent class about desire and representation in film. American cinema has what is the classic example of the (im going to use vulgar pop psychology terms for sake of simplicity)ego/id opposition, that is between the 'cover story' and what the real 'libidinal investments' of the characters are, whats really going on behind the scenes. This opposition has a historical precedent, think of McCarthyism and hollywood Black listing. In order for artists to truly get across what they wanted to say was to tell it through a superficial medium, that is, by interweaving darker elements into standard narratives in order to elude censors. Back to comics: my parents think comics are silly, so do most adults and intellectuals. What they dont realize is that the same opposition is working. The medium itself is a cover story for expressing things in the american imaginary far deeper. Take Rambo...the cover story is basic action hero macho guy stuff, a level deeper and its about the crisis of the american masculine identity and its relationship to father figures and the alienation and dehumanizing horror of war. with Batman? just look at Harvey Dent. He represents exactly what the Law is, an absolute schism within itself. Just think about how a person like Batman, going out there with justice as his absolute ideal, refusing to murder, can be arrested because of the law. There are two sides to the law, it helps, but what it really is is a tool for the powerful and the corrupt. and if we want to go even deeper, lets take the eye of the beholder issue as Dent's origin. Look at how Bruce and Harvey are what they are because of their relationship to their fathers. both internally split because of something violent associated with their father figures. Look at what pop philosopher Zizek recently said: "...everybody's father is a figure who failed to live up to his mandate," everybody's father "left to his son the task to settle his symbolic debts."

Arkham Asylum got me into comics AND into studying Jung psychoanalysis. This is a pretty cool analysis of the themes that Nolan is presenting in The Dark Knight. This would make a cool thread. Awesome.
 
It's symbolic, you fool :whatever: The Batsignal represents Batman's relationship with Gordon. It represents Gordon's faith in Batman and hope for the city of Gotham. It is a constant presence in the lore of The Dark Knight both in the comics and in the movies. I'm sorry, but having Gordon himself destroy it is a huge deal. Yes, even perhaps - epic.

There's really no need for name-calling and getting all :whatever: about it. Come on now...

I totally realize what it means and "represents"...I can read comics too. But if Gordon's hand is forced by people above him (city leaders and civic activists or whatever), and, ultimately the destruction was a short-lived PR move strictly in the script of this movie's plot (citizens of Gotham City split on the presence/influence of Batman, and what his actions represent, etc.), I can see that as a part of the movie too (with a bigger, better one ultimately replacing it by movie's end).

I said earlier that Gordon's heart wouldn't be in it, and he's doing it for the moment because he has to maybe? It'll make for a neat scene, no doubt, but I don't think it's "epic" because I don't think it's real. To me it's "epic" if Gordon turned his back on Batman, and destroys it in true anger/rage, severing the bond between them. That's true drama and grit! That's "epic". Especially if the movie ended on that note, leaving us hanging until a third one...(we don't know if that's a possibility either?). They might pull an "Empire Strikes Back" on us, leaving this second one on a bit of a downer, "oh-no!" note, to get us all amped for a third installment? That would be a neat way for this to end...

But a symbolic PR stunt that he's not on board with to begin doesn't bother me much, no (if indeed that's what is going on; we don't know). Or are you guys actually thinking Gordon permanently destroys it, and it's never used again? I can't imagine that being the case.

:huh:
 
Bale has mentioned that Batman is facing a new kind of angst. This could be what he is talking about. It is widely beleived that at some point, blame is placed on Batman for causing the widespread chaos in Gotham. Gordon, at the end of Begins, warns Batman of the escalation his prescence will cause. Clearly, Batman had no idea that it would be this bad, as stated in the teaser trailer. My guess is that Gordon's trust in Batman will be shattered early on in the film but will slowly rebuild itself towards the end. The wild-card in the story is Harvey Dent. His transformation into Harvey Dent will presumably occur towards the end of the film, but how will Gordon react to this?

The Dark Knight is beginning to seem a very appropriate title.
 
Batman is the only superhero that still sticks with me, im 21.
when it comes to graphic novels, I've moved onto guys like morrison that really take the self-awareness about the medium and run with it. but batman is one of those comics that possess the quality that...that american action films uniquely possess in my opinion. I also study psychoanalysis, and we had a recent class about desire and representation in film. American cinema has what is the classic example of the (im going to use vulgar pop psychology terms for sake of simplicity)ego/id opposition, that is between the 'cover story' and what the real 'libidinal investments' of the characters are, whats really going on behind the scenes. This opposition has a historical precedent, think of McCarthyism and hollywood Black listing. In order for artists to truly get across what they wanted to say was to tell it through a superficial medium, that is, by interweaving darker elements into standard narratives in order to elude censors. Back to comics: my parents think comics are silly, so do most adults and intellectuals. What they dont realize is that the same opposition is working. The medium itself is a cover story for expressing things in the american imaginary far deeper. Take Rambo...the cover story is basic action hero macho guy stuff, a level deeper and its about the crisis of the american masculine identity and its relationship to father figures and the alienation and dehumanizing horror of war. with Batman? just look at Harvey Dent. He represents exactly what the Law is, an absolute schism within itself. Just think about how a person like Batman, going out there with justice as his absolute ideal, refusing to murder, can be arrested because of the law. There are two sides to the law, it helps, but what it really is is a tool for the powerful and the corrupt. and if we want to go even deeper, lets take the eye of the beholder issue as Dent's origin. Look at how Bruce and Harvey are what they are because of their relationship to their fathers. both internally split because of something violent associated with their father figures. Look at what pop philosopher Zizek recently said: "...everybody's father is a figure who failed to live up to his mandate," everybody's father "left to his son the task to settle his symbolic debts."
A bit :dry: due to lack of paragraphs...but very neat points! Bring on the philosophy woohoo! :woot: Maybe should be a new thread though. Hm.

Batman is actually the only superhero for me - I have yet to really pin down why the character has stuck with me so long, even after Tim Burton's movies scarred my childhood (yeah, yeah, I was an easily-scared kid). I think it's because he makes himself who he is, he wasn't given a gift besides a fat inheritance. It's the sacrifice he makes and his will to endure despite all of the odds against him.
 
A bit :dry: due to lack of paragraphs...but very neat points! Bring on the philosophy woohoo! :woot: Maybe should be a new thread though. Hm.

Batman is actually the only superhero for me - I have yet to really pin down why the character has stuck with me so long, even after Tim Burton's movies scarred my childhood (yeah, yeah, I was an easily-scared kid). I think it's because he makes himself who he is, he wasn't given a gift besides a fat inheritance. It's the sacrifice he makes and his will to endure despite all of the odds against him.

me too! i try to read other superhero comics but im just like "woah these guys are...stupid"...batman just struck a chord with me when i was a wee, wee little lad and its been that way ever since. when i was little i actually had a batman kite, where there was this big batman action figure attached to a bat symbol shaped kite...it was the worst kite ever. i think the main appeal of batman is that he has faults and darkness and isnt just a "goody "goody". he's almost psychotic... i dont know what it is, its just like...even in the justice league comics, the panels just..come alive when batman is in them. he's just the BEST superhero, hands down. i think the biggest appeal is that he's just an ASS sometimes, which i love, personally.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
200,509
Messages
21,742,829
Members
45,573
Latest member
vortep88
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"