The Dark Knight Nicholson on Ledger playing the Joker

..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................it..................................floats?


Aaaaha! And what else floats on water?
 
i havnt read through the thread so how long was it before the die hard nolan fans tore nicholson and burton apart
 
When you find out Jack's really just an old perverted alcoholic, the battle is pretty much over.
 
When you find out Jack's really just an old perverted alcoholic, the battle is pretty much over.
Oh, Perverted Alcoholics. How I miss thee. Yeah, we all figured that out 2 days ago and this thread keeps on churning. God Bless Fanfolk.
 
damn this boards getting tame. if you so much as mentioned you liked the originals you were tore apart and told you had no business calling yourself a fan
it got really bad at some point. Then a whole discussion about Heath and Brokeback, you know
 
it got really bad at some point. Then a whole discussion about Heath and Brokeback, you know

lol. i must admit i'm looking forward to see how ledger does joker but i will say he has to live up to both nicholson and hamill, say what you want about be but IMO these two have perfected the character
 
Anyone who says they didn't like Batman Begins does hereby have their Batman fandom membership revoked and sentenced to watch Batman & Robin in a continuous loop until they break down and admit they liked Batman Begins.

LMAO!! That is true. If people see enough of B&R, they will be glad to prefer BB over B&R. I know that will work. :p

Someone can't handle the truth. :o

You can't handle the truth!!

quotestruth-701634.jpg
 
Well, I can´t judge Keaton´s acting for what was not written for him or he didn´t try to add on his own if that was the case. Comparing the two Batmen I see on the screen, I prefer Bale´s.

That's fine. I prefer Bale's, too. Still...Keaton absolutely nailed his role.

It wasn´t a radical difference, nothing that serious, certain people talk about it like he uses a squeaky voice in one scene and a grave one in other

It's very noticeable, therefore it's quite a radical difference. Does it ruin the movie? No. Is it distracting and something many hope he fixes in the sequel? Yes.

and mostly consistent with the purpose of each scene, he´s not talking to the characters in the same situation every time.

By that logic Batman should never have to maintain the same kind of voice because he's often in a different situation.

When he talks to Rachel in the subway, it´s not the same thing as on the rooftop

I'd argue that it is. Both times he rescues her, is clearly supposed to be in Batman mode. Both times he's clearly going for something intimidating and animal-like.

when he talks to Gordon in AA´s stairway, it´s not the same thing as when Gordon´s at home.

You're right, there is a noticeable difference to the timbre and pitch of his voice. And there need not be. Both times he is explaining something to Gordon, not trying to scare him, but trying to sound like "Batman".

Anyway...

BATMAN BEGINS wasn't deep. It had some elements that could be considered "serious", but nothing was actually explored enough to make it a "deep" movie.

As far as Jack's comments...who cares? He's clearly not entirely serious and only wishes he could have been The Joker again way back when.

Jack Nicholson was a fantastic Joker, and BATMAN presented a great Joker for the late eighties.

He talked to her like that in the Batcave because he was starting to let his guard down, he wanted her to know he was batman.

The dialogue doesn't bear that out at all. He's using lines like "I don't have the luxury of friends", and short terse sentences that give her directions. Yes, he's clearly lonely and likes her when he takes off his cowl, but before that, he's all business.

Hmm...kind of like in BATMAN...

And at least begins had action Superman didnt do S**T till the end of the movie, the rest of the movie was just planning and plotting.

The man caught a falling shuttle and plane. And you're saying he did nothing? :)

And at least Batman fought someone evenly matched with him..... Superman fought Lex Luthor.... again.... who had a plan to sell Real Estate.... AGAIN......

And Luthor beat him, damn near murdered him and destroyed half the world. I wouldn't say Lex was a "throwaway villain" on any level in SUPERMAN RETURNS. He just had a stupid plan for the continent he was building.

Oh and by the way Superman has a kid. This was done in an attempt to make him more relateable, hey genius writers if you want to make superman more relatable, dont have him lift a island of Kryptonite into space. So now he really has no weakness, really relateable.

He soaked in all the sun for a reason. To counteract the Kryptonite. The point of the scene is that it hurts him, but he knows he has to save the world.

And give me an instance of something that was OVERLY spoonfed in Begins

"Fear" as the theme. And, oh yes, the three or four times that Batman and that stupid water guy explained what was going to happen to Gotham when the train reached Wayne Tower.
 
Hey Jack-quit talking like you own the role.You dont hear Cesar Romero spouting off, do you?Sounds like you need an enema!
 
BATMAN BEGINS wasn't deep. It had some elements that could be considered "serious", but nothing was actually explored enough to make it a "deep" movie.


I guess that is subjective. Because I believe that BB is a very deep movie, maybe due to the fact that I have faced some things Bruce has to a degree in my life but I thought it was a very deep movie. And some of my fav movies are Blade Runner, and some of Kubrick's work. So I'm not one of those Bay watchers.

As I said earlier, a movie does not have to be silent, and un-straitforward to be deep. To me even if a movie spoon feeds you its not a big deal, and does not detract away from a movie being deep, it just means that some parts are being explained more.

When I watched BB I was never whining about it being too explanitive, I guess this is just another one of those nit picks that fans find, and turn peanuts into elephants and make waay to big of deals out of something so small.

But I think the deepness is subjective. Because I know some that still dont' think Blade Runner is as deep as I see it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"