The Dark Knight How awesome was Two-Face's face?

[Slain]

I agree. It was definitley a lot better with the CGI added in, this movie does have a lot of realism to it, but some things don't have to be. Realism is good and well, but it doesn't matter if they add in a few twists to throw us off sometimes. I was surprised at his appearance, I didn't think it would look that bad. But, I thought it was good.

 

[staffroyce]

I doubted Aaron before but I was wrong.

 

[Judson Caspian]

I never doubted him. He did the kind of dynamic performance I expected.

It's so uninspired to always do the same things.

This has to be the most uninspired comment ever. It's like saying Batman can wear a pink suit and use fluffy batarangs. He needs to try new things... Uhm, yeah.

It's been said many times before: Don't fix something that isn't broken. The chemical bath origin can certainly be discussed. The acid origin is fine as it is.

 

[Viper81]

lol

How dare someone defy any minor detail about this film?

All I was saying is:

1. It's not a realistic look
2. The unrealism was enough (in a realistic-esque kind of movie) to through me out of the movie a couple of times.

Do I expect everything to be realistic? Hell no.

Was it THAT big a deal? Not at all.

But people making over how good he looked, must simply be referring to the comic book version of him (which is fine).

There is no leg of any arguement that will convince me that that's how someone would look in real life if his face got burnt off.

Again, though, it's a movie, so I don't care.

 

[Superhobo]

There is no leg of any arguement that will convince me that that's how someone would look in real life if his face got burnt off.

You mean like that photo I posted a page back of that guy with half his face (and skull) burnt off?

 

[Jokers_Wild]

It couldn't have been any better for me. Creepy, disturbing, and pretty realistic. Perfect blend of CGI and make-up.

 

[Carmine Falcone]

This has to be the most uninspired comment ever. It's like saying Batman can wear a pink suit and use fluffy batarangs. He needs to try new things... Uhm, yeah.

Nonsense.

It's been said many times before: Don't fix something that isn't broken. The chemical bath origin can certainly be discussed. The acid origin is fine as it is.

Narrow minded.

 

[ronny]

Two-Face was incredible, a dripping, raw, revolting spectacle that everyone involved should be proud of.
Wouldn't have worked if Eckhart wasn't so absolutely stunning in the role.

 

[emj2006]

It was kind of funny how Aaron LIED to us about harvey getting acid in the face. Worked out good though, he had us thinking. I was wondering if they did go with the acid/courtroom story just how would HALF of his face be gone if they threw acid on him. That wouldn't be realistic. I'm glad it turned out the way it idd.

 

[TNC9852002]

Embarrassingly bad. I was sure the "leaked" photo of Two Face a few months ago was either fan-made or an early rough. I was amazed to see it actually used in the film! It was like something out of a 1960's Vincent Price movie (which I love by the way), but this is 2008 and VP is departed (RIP). Nolan should have gone with a severely burned look with the left eye obscured with melted skin. Harvey's transformation was totally unbelievable as well. A complete waste of a classic character.

He didn't really transform in my eyes...How many times have you seen the movie?

-TNC

 

[nathaniel]

I actually hate the CGI on twoface in TDK and see it as distracting and totally unesessary the medium has become so common some people dont blink when it appears on screen but it is pretty bad in my opinion especially with the huge advances in makeup tecniques which could have produced a more real looking effect.

 

[Nivek]

He looked so hideous, I thought his whiskey was going to leak from his throat.

A little bit did drip out of his mouth after he tabled the shot.

 

[Quinzel]

I just kept watching that piece of skin attached on his lip.

 

[Cobblepot]

It couldn't have been any better for me. Creepy, disturbing, and pretty realistic. Perfect blend of CGI and make-up.

Yup, I'm satisfied.

 

[Superhobo]

I actually hate the CGI on twoface in TDK and see it as distracting and totally unesessary the medium has become so common some people dont blink when it appears on screen but it is pretty bad in my opinion especially with the huge advances in makeup tecniques which could have produced a more real looking effect.

Clearly only a master of phonetics and syntax could compose such a masterful...run-on sentence.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Is the Joker chemical bath issue seriously being brought up in this thread? NONSENSE!

 

[Darknightnomis]

It was perfect!

They should win an oscar for the make up.

 

[xisaacx]

Pictures speak louder than actions....

Difference is In the dark knight, those actually look like BURNS from the fire


the other two face was burned by acid...so acid turns your face purple?

 

[ronny]

A guy in my home town had acid thrown in his face, it left unsightly red blotches all over the skin. Nothing purple there.

 

[mrbrownie]

Two-Face was awesome. The look, the arc, the performance from Echart. It TIES with Ledger's Joker as my favorite thing about this movie. The look was horrifying and nasty (that gets a gasp when you first see it on opening night from the entire audience), but not so much that you look away to avoid puking. It is gross and ghastily, but not stomach churning so.

As for the look, well the idea of Two-Face is silly. The man would get infections all over that open wound if it hasn't been fixed (which they would do without his permissiion after they realized he was insane) and die within a matter of days. And you're right he wouldn't be able to talk and his left eye would go blind within hours and shrivel up in days as well.

BUT THIS IS A COMIC BOOOK MOVIE. Nolan did not intend this to be real life or taken as something that can happen, he just grounds it in so much realism and reality you accept the fantastical things as possible in a setting that is our world. Because the Joker and especially Batman re pretty unrealistic too.

So we establish that an injury like Two-Face's is probable and survivable, though the victim would die in days due to major infection right?

So it's possible that someone with Twoface's accident could survive and do everything he did in his last couple of days of life? He survived just like two days with the injury, we don't know if he

would've survived hadn't he died

in the movie.

Back to topic, I got dissapointed when I saw it first on IMAX, the CGI was really shiny and the mouth tendon looked like plastic bubblegum, but without the eye of the designer on, it looked awesome, then I went to see it to a normal theater and due to the lesser quality compared to the IMAX, Two Face looked awesome!

 

[Mrs.J]

The CGI was spectacular. Im glad that it was grotesque. Thats what I wanted.
It was amazing. I loved every part of watching it.
It blew all my expectations out of the water. I never would have guessed he would look like that.

Well, i was hoping for exposed skull (however you want to take that. I am weird so sorry ). So im happy.

Amazing job.

nuff said.

 

[strikezone89]

well i actually never doubted aarons performance when he was cast... i expected great things and that what we got.

 

[SKSpawn]

I loved the look, I was pro-Darkman inspired burns right from the start and the outcome was exactly what I was hoping for. It really was as if the comic Two-Face had come to life.

I was surprised that Nolan didn't do something else to his bad eye though, considering the slight unrealistic aspect that was, but Two-Face was only active for a matter of hours, not days, so I can believe the rest.

Anyone else, though, a little peeved at the live action movies constantly using the name "Harvey Two-Face" though? Just a small thing, and it was only mentioned once and I got why it was and it actually made sense this time around but, still...

 

[nathaniel]

Clearly only a master of phonetics and syntax could compose such a masterful...run-on sentence.

And only a immature fool dodges the debate to personally abuse someone who has a differing opinion.

Im not gonna lie, the CGI was unesessary and distracting but Eckhart in general was a dissapointment moreso because i didnt think he was that great an actor in the first place, watch black Daliah and Thank you for smoking and you have his complete acting reparte in a nutshell. And unlike other actors who have similer styles in thier movies he doesnt have the gravitas of morgan freeman or the intensity bale usually has in spades. he (Eckhart) has no real bite to his acting, its just decent, harvey has a steel to him eckhart couldnt portray if his life depended on it imo.

 

[El Payaso]

For me it was the best part of the movie. Not only his story is there perfectly done and captured but it was so serious and realistic I could feel I was appreciating the character like if it was the first time I know him.

And what can I say about the make-up! Perfect!

I think Two-Face was perfect.

Spoiler

I'm glad they killed him. We got the full arc of his story, heroic rise, to tragic downfall. If they had brought him back, I fear he would've just became a generic villain.

I agree with you. Speciallky on the spoilers bit. I'm glad it happened that way and I prefer it to be kept like that.