The Dark Knight The Prestige, and Nolan's vision of theatricality (Joker)

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I don't think the Joker's over-the-top nature is lost on the Nolan Bros. Something I found cool in THE PRESTIGE, was how Angier was not as good a magician as Borden......but was much more of a showman, which is why he was where he was really.

The Joker's a showman. The question is, how will they balance that with the psycho. That's not easy.

Do any of you really think the Joker won't smile? Or won't laugh? I mean, c'mon.....it's crazy to think that way.

 

[Silver Souper]

that analogy doesn't work because the idea of cloning isn't randomly thrown in at the end. it's introduced mid-film.

but it's introduced as an illusion with a rational explanation behind it, just like everything else in the film that's related to the appearance of magic. the tricks in the film reveal their "prestige" with a logical (real) mechanical explanation- of course until the finale when things go suddenly fantastic and sci-fi.

 

[Silver Souper]

Exactly. Batman's going to have his work cut out for him, you can be sure of that. I'm hoping the Arkham breakout is directly referenced, including the capture of Scarecrow (this is likely as Tim Booth has been confirmed to return as Zzasz).

nice to have you on the hype Paste Pot Pete- i haven't seen your posts until this thread. you make some good points...

I don't think the Joker's over-the-top nature is lost on the Nolan Bros. Something I found cool in THE PRESTIGE, was how Angier was not as good a magician as Borden......but was much more of a showman, which is why he was where he was really.

The Joker's a showman. The question is, how will they balance that with the psycho. That's not easy.

Do any of you really think the Joker won't smile? Or won't laugh? I mean, c'mon.....it's crazy to think that way.

there we go- now we're back on topic yeah see i was very aware of nolan's use of theatricality and showmanship, which to me, played too cold and impersonal. it wasn't as effective as the showmanship in the illusionist IMO. now this may have been intentional, as nolan might have wanted to paint the very bleak picture that was the film's tone, but I'm hoping he won't rely on the same somewhat clunky and impersonal tone that I felt while watching Jackman's theatrics. To be clear- they certainly didn't avoid the theatrics in The Prestige, but I felt less than compelled in most cases while watching the "show."

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

nice to have you on the hype Paste Pot Pete- i haven't seen your posts until this thread. you make some good points...

Thank you, likewise!

I drop in and out. Frankly, I have trouble keeping up with some of the harder heads around here. Some are simply too set in their ways to get into a good, healthy debate/convo.

Kudos for establishing and maintaining a great thread!

 

[Silver Souper]

Thank you, likewise!

I drop in and out. Frankly, I have trouble keeping up with some of the harder heads around here. Some are simply too set in their ways to get into a good, healthy debate/convo.

Kudos for establishing and maintaining a great thread!

thanks my friend. Yeah I agree- there was even some stuff earlier in this thread that was lame. One guy insulting another because he didn't agree. It's a lot more fun when people can disagree, argue and have a good time with it all.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I thought Jackman's charisma did shine through, though. And, he kinda wore some rather..."showy" clothing too. Moreso than Bale. I'm not saying that Jackman's character's showmanship is an indication that it will be like that in the Joker's character.

I'm just pointing out that the Nolans do understand the concept of showmanship, which is something some people on this board seem to not know.

 

[The Last Meatbag]

Well I'll start this off by saying I loved the first half of The Prestige, and then I watched as the second half slowed to a near stop, bogged down by plot holes and leaps in logic and coinsidence. But it was the ending that really pissed me off. I haven't felt cheated in theaters like that since The Village. I realize it was based on the source material but...LAME!

I think the movie gave us some clues into Nolan's vision of theatricality and pomp (Jackman's showmanship). I almost wonder if Nolan considered this his "revving up" to portray the Joker, who will show similar characteristics in TDK.

I have to say, The Prestige seemed increasingly clunky and detached in the way Nolan portrayed fantastical and theatrical elements. I am not fearing for the life of the Batman franchise like some paranoid fans, but I thought it was worth the discussion since Nolan's never really tackled a character like the Joker before, and The Prestige's magicians are probably the closest he's come to him yet.

Although the Joker is menacing, evil and frightening, he needs to have an undeniable watchability and appeal, not to mention a flamboyance, vanity and certain level of cheer. I hope Nolan won't lose those things in favor of showing his grisly side. Too much "dark" and the definable characteristics of Joker are lost. Based on The Prestige, I wonder if he's going to be able to deliver us the balance that is The Joker.

just an idea. Thoughts?

How do you sleep at night knowing you have horrible taste?






Srsly?

 

[MechaOrga]

How do you sleep at night knowing you have horrible taste?






Srsly?

LOl you wrote exactly what i was thinking.

I love the prestige. Saw it twice in the theatre and 4 times since i picked up the dvd.

I think its his best film behind memento, and i hope TDK has as much going on in a positive way as The Prestige.....

 

[cryptic name]

but it's introduced as an illusion with a rational explanation behind it, just like everything else in the film that's related to the appearance of magic. the tricks in the film reveal their "prestige" with a logical (real) mechanical explanation- of course until the finale when things go suddenly fantastic and sci-fi.

i meant when tesla shows him the duplicates of the hats and the cat after going through the machine. there's no other explaination provided

 

[Leon the Professional]

are you sure? We have heard that others will be included; it's speculation so far.



Your first paragraph: duh. I understand the character's motivations. Second paragraph: You don't think it's far fetched? Okay
Third paragraph: Lack of imagination and interest in fantasy? ahaha nice try. See if you can follow this: You're watching a psychological thriller. The murderer is just about to escape at the end when- SLAM! a large alien foot stomps on the murderer, kills him and saves the day. Does that seem like a viable conclusion to a psychological thriller? No, it sounds like the story jumped the genre shark in order to get itself out of it's trapped narrative. And by pointing out the story's absurdity does not mean you don't like fantasy or sci-fi. It means you like both when they're introduced into films that follow their own rules. That's why the majority of fantasy and sci-fi films suck lately- they're lazily written and typically break the rules established by film's end.




Tesla's machine is an ABSURD coinsidence and a stretch in reasoning, when applying the film's rules of reality. If you take the time to go back and read what I've posted, you'll see why I see it as an absurd coinsidence. In addition, out of the 10 or so people that I know who saw the Prestige, none of us liked it for similar reasons. According to rottentomatoes, the critical consensus for the prestige was lower than any of Nolan's previous efforts. It is worth pointing that out as a measuring stick. If you visit the site, you'll find plenty of critics who site similar objections.

Like:

The movie is more infuriating and contrived than suspenseful and clever.

By film's end, the notion of a rational and satisfying climax has hopelessly disappeared in a silly spiral of one-upmanship and a barrage of half-baked revelations that won't make you marvel so much as shrug and forget about them.

The Nolan brothers] have collaborated on a script that is sometimes on target, but hopelessly hamstrung by a wobbly second half for which its grand finale cannot compensate.

Parts of the film really stand out, but taken as a whole, it's a labyrinth of conflicting ideas.

By describing the structure of a great trick in a movie about a great trick, The Prestige makes a promise it can't keep. Its third act is about as convincing as a photo of a cow jumping over the moon.

If we are going to discuss this, then provide your own thoughts instead of quoting critics. Besides, Prestige still has a fresh rating at Rotten Tomatoes, so if you want to go down that route I can provide more positive quotes than you can provide negative quotes.

Plus, if you look at imdb.com, it is rated #164 with an average rating of 8.2 from over 35,000 votes, which I think beats your 10 people.

But now for my thoughts...

First of all, the Tesla machine is not a coincidence since it was not pre-built. Angier requested that Tesla build it.

Furthermore, the Tesla machine is not absurd within the film's rules of reality, because the film clearly establishes that Tesla is accomplishing extraordinary scientific feets. Just because the film focuses on "fake" magic via illusion does not mean it dismisses "real" magic via science. There is nothing within the context of the film that contradicts the possibility of such a cloning machine.

You may not like that the film incorporates such science fiction, and you may prefer that it instead stuck solely with reality, in which case I would respect your opinion completely. But the fact you don't like it does not make it absurd or filled with plot holes.

 

[Ming]

With all these counter arguments, one must wonder what you were expecting from The Pristige. If the turn was too much for you might not want to go see TDK, you may be disappointed.

I most certainly do not want you to be disappointed my confused friend.

 

[NinjaTurtleFan]

I think the Nolan is going to pull it off and compared to the lame villians in the two Spider-Man movies, I think the Joker will rank as a modern date Hannibal Lecter.

Lame villains? Green Goblin and Doc Ock ****ing rocked. What movie were you watching?

 

[StorminNorman]

Lame villains? Green Goblin and Doc Ock ****ing rocked. What movie were you watching?

Green Goblin was badass.

Doc Ock - Meh.

 

[Katsuro]

Green Goblin was badass.

Doc Ock - Meh.

I consider a guy with four tentacle arms much more menacing than a Power Ranger. As far off from the comics as the movie's Doc Ock was, I enjoyed him as a villain.

 

[Silver Souper]

How do you sleep at night knowing you have horrible taste?






Srsly?

That was a fantastic post. Seriously, thank you for contributing something useful to the discussion.

 

[Silver Souper]

i meant when tesla shows him the duplicates of the hats and the cat after going through the machine. there's no other explaination provided

So what? I remember those scenes clearly- he kept going back to that slow panning shot of the hats, it was quite overtly hinted at. we agree. that does not explain the huge coinsidence of the tesla machine; both the convienant timing of it's creation and the ridiculous actual function of the machine.

If we are going to discuss this, then provide your own thoughts instead of quoting critics. Besides, Prestige still has a fresh rating at Rotten Tomatoes, so if you want to go down that route I can provide more positive quotes than you can provide negative quotes.

Plus, if you look at imdb.com, it is rated #164 with an average rating of 8.2 from over 35,000 votes, which I think beats your 10 people.

But now for my thoughts...

First of all, the Tesla machine is not a coincidence since it was not pre-built. Angier requested that Tesla build it.

Furthermore, the Tesla machine is not absurd within the film's rules of reality, because the film clearly establishes that Tesla is accomplishing extraordinary scientific feets. Just because the film focuses on "fake" magic via illusion does not mean it dismisses "real" magic via science. There is nothing within the context of the film that contradicts the possibility of such a cloning machine.

You may not like that the film incorporates such science fiction, and you may prefer that it instead stuck solely with reality, in which case I would respect your opinion completely. But the fact you don't like it does not make it absurd or filled with plot holes.

thanks for your post. remember, my main point of this was not to lead all of you away from the prestige if you happen to like it. those who like it are bound to defend its plot mechanisms (pun intended) and those who weren't thrilled by it- well, we have quite a few reasons for that.

as for quoting the tomatometer, that was not to invalidate your claim or seal mine in safety, it was to say that what I'm arguing is not completely unheard of. 1/3 of critics agreed with me. Yes, the majority of fans enjoyed it. Help yourself. All i'm saying is, my critique is not a first. there were website message boards raging back and forth over the legitimacy of the finale of that film, and a few other concepts in the narrative, and many were displeased.

BUT STILL, the tesla machine, i will say again for the last time, is a huge coinsidence in timing with the plot. I'll bet i could even get nolan to admit to that if I asked him. bale sends jackman on what's intended to be a wild goose chase while he continues his own "fake" duplication trick, and his journal leads him intentionally to tesla, who happens to, convienantly and for the first time in human history, create THE MACHINE which allows jackman to one-up bale for the finale, and mimicking the same trick bale did but for real!?! i realize jackman was gone for awhile but dude, you have to accept that many who saw the film walked out feeling like that was a lame, and awkwardly handled solution- an ACTUAL duplication machine. we understood tesla's expertise and amazing feats, but the bottom line is- you see him creating the machine as ironic and cool, we see it as ridiculous and inconsistent with the reality that the film was based in, and extremely coinsidental (the fact that tesla was actually able to pull that off and in a timeframe when those two were still dueling so that it could turn the story towards it's final showdown).

i've made myself clear. yes of course i would've preferred that the film stay based in reality, since they went to such great pains to show the prestige for several lesser tricks, and all those were based in reality. or, if they wanted to go with a mix of sci-fi, then have some previous science fiction moments so that you don't blindside the audience in the final moments with some incompatible solution.

another example: the surprise ending to 'usual suspects'- fantastic. and because it was clever, and imaginable- as in possible within the confines of that story, though unlikely and thus the surprise. Not just "easy way out #147." had kevin spacey turned into a supernatural force at the end and rewound time to alter the events of the usual suspects as his way to walk free, then you'd be hearing similar complaints as you do with the prestige.

so instead of us going back and forth about tesla's machine, tell me what you thought of the way nolan captured theatricality in the movie? Do you think he's going to handle the more flamboyant aspects of the joker correctly?

 

[Damiean Dark]

I still beleive Nolan will try to portray Joker more in a TDKR/ hannibull lecter mold, creepy and unsmiling (TDKR) and long speeches on madness (lecter) like in BB where fear was the big topic its not my joker (which would ideally be a mix of B89 and btas joker but with more violent scenes) but id should be interesting.

 

[ryan dube]

Some info on our Joker:

The darkest character appearing in stories from this time was the Joker, a psychopath who from the first isssue would use a special toxin to bring death to his often victims which would leave them smiling inanely. In the 1940s and 50s, however, the Joker was toned down into being more of a playful trickster, and during the Silver Age supervillains in general would be based on gimmicks rather than disturbing psychological illnesses.

Initially portrayed as a violent sociopath who murders people for his own amusement, the Joker, later in the 1940s period that fans and historians call the Golden Age of Comic Books, began to be written as a goofy trickster-thief. That characterization continued through the late-1950s and 1960s Silver Age before the character became again depicted as a vicious, sociopathic killer.



So basically we are going to get a man that calls himself the Joker, who doesn't dress up and his hair won't be green, he will probably just wear a suit, gloves and a painted smile on his face. Most likely he will be alone, so no Harley Quinn and/or thugs. You have to remember how the Scarecrow was given to us visually, he only had a mask, that was it, no full on costume, so I can only assume that this is how we will see Nolan's Joker, just a serial killer that uses toxins to kill his victims...

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

Some info on our Joker:



So basically we are going to get a man that calls himself the Joker, who doesn't dress up and his hair won't be green, he will probably just wear a suit, gloves and a painted smile on his face. Most likely he will be alone, so no Harley Quinn and/or thugs. You have to remember how the Scarecrow was given to us visually, he only had a mask, that was it, no full on costume, so I can only assume that this is how we will see Nolan's Joker, just a serial killer that uses toxins to kill his victims...

No offense, but that's a poor assumption. I've detailed several times why comparing Begins' Crane to TDK's Joker is simply apples and oranges.

Crane, up until the horseback scene, was not a "supervillain." He was a doctor who secretly performed cruel experiments on his patients. He couldn't exactly walk around Arkham Aslyum wearing a suit of straw and a wide-brimmed hat. He carrried only a mask because it doubled as a gas mask and increased the element of fear he imposed upon his victims (as well as being able to neatly fit in his briefcase). He was trying to be as inconspicuous as possible!

The Joker is the exact opposite. He is all about theatricality, as Gordon pointed out at the end of the movie. He is not looking to conduct his business in secret, like Crane naturally had to. He is a showman, and he will be wide open for the world to see. He is not comparable to Crane. He is most comparable to Batman himself, and in that sense, I think we can expect a full-on "costume" (for lack of a better word).

 

[ryan dube]

I hope you're right, I am just setting myself up so that I am not dissapointed when I see Heath on screen...

 

[StorminNorman]

Some info on our Joker:

The darkest character appearing in stories from this time was the Joker, a psychopath who from the first isssue would use a special toxin to bring death to his often victims which would leave them smiling inanely. In the 1940s and 50s, however, the Joker was toned down into being more of a playful trickster, and during the Silver Age supervillains in general would be based on gimmicks rather than disturbing psychological illnesses.

Initially portrayed as a violent sociopath who murders people for his own amusement, the Joker, later in the 1940s period that fans and historians call the Golden Age of Comic Books, began to be written as a goofy trickster-thief. That characterization continued through the late-1950s and 1960s Silver Age before the character became again depicted as a vicious, sociopathic killer.



So basically we are going to get a man that calls himself the Joker, who doesn't dress up and his hair won't be green, he will probably just wear a suit, gloves and a painted smile on his face. Most likely he will be alone, so no Harley Quinn and/or thugs. You have to remember how the Scarecrow was given to us visually, he only had a mask, that was it, no full on costume, so I can only assume that this is how we will see Nolan's Joker, just a serial killer that uses toxins to kill his victims...

That entire paragraph didn't dip into the Joker's style as a psycho killer. The Joker wore a purple suit, he has always worn the suit, why should that change? Plus the Scarecrow was given us in full costume, at the end of the movie. The entire criminal population is now forever changed, either because of Batman or the Scarecrows scare toxin. Gordan noted the "theatricality" of the Joker IN Batman Begins. There is no reason to believe that the Joker will lose that in between movies.

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

I hope you're right, I am just setting myself up so that I am not dissapointed when I see Heath on screen...

Skepticism can be healthy; cautious optimism even moreso. It's just that there's a pervading pessimism (I don't mean you) around here that I find pretty unwarranted.

It's like some people completely forgot about Begins being so good and now are completely back to square one in their worrying; as if we don't know what the people involved are capable of (If you didn't like Begins, well that's a different story; though I'd question why you'd waste your time here anyway ).

 

[ryan dube]

all that info I got from Wikipedia...just FYI


I liked Begins, the only problem I had with it was Batman's speech impediment...lol but that was so minor I don't dwell on it...


I just can't see Nolan not play down the Joker, trying to make it so non-campy that he takes any zeal that the Joker/Heath could portray

 

[Crooklyn]

I liked Begins, the only problem I had with it was Batman's speech impediment...lol but that was so minor I don't dwell on it...

 

[ryan dube]

The Joker wore a purple suit, he has always worn the suit, why should that change?

The Batman has always worn a blue/black costume in those same comics that the Joker wore his purple suit in, why did they change that? Some things don't look so good on screen...

Now if they put Heath in a black suit with purple pinstripes, that might work, that might live in Nolan's world...