The Dark Knight What aspects of The Dark Knight do you think will influence future films in Hollywood

[hatebox]

If respect was given out where it was due across the whole board, then fair enough but the attention is still on the joker performance.

I mean look at batman begins and the dark knight. batman begins started falling apart in its third act but the dark knight was strong and consistent all the way through with a better known villain. Does it warrant this much cash on its own merit? It's impossible to tell. Personally I doubt it.

But I think you're still confusing Ledger's death with Ledger's performance. The majority of people are seeing this movie because of word of mouth on how great he is as the Joker, not because it's his last full role. And that being the case, you have to say fair enough.

I'd also point out the hype for this movie was already very big before January. The full trailer debuted with I Am Legend in December and it was all the internet and just about everyone who saw it could talk about that month. And the vast majority of posters apprehensive of Nolan's Joker were suddenly far more excited on this board.

The hype was definitely there before Ledger's death, it wasn't suddenly created in the 6 months before TDK's release. Of course, headlines talking about ledger's passing also gave a tone of free press to TDK, but that would only account for a big opening weekend - not the tremendous legs it's displaying.

As for not warranting the amount of money it's making, well.. that's 100% subjective. My opinion is that TDK is by some distance the best comic book movie ever made so of course I'm going to think it deserves to be the biggest earner of the genre.

 

[nhoj3]

I don't think the dark knight is really going to influence anything.

let's not beat around the bush. It not for heath's death and the publicity around it, it would not be doing as well as it did today.

I hate to agree with you, but if we're being honest, I think that we have to. The reason that "The Dark Knight" is making the money that it's making is beacuse it's managed to cross audience boundaries. To make this kind of money, you need to appeal to both young and old, both men and women.

As much as us comic book fans would like to believe that the whole world is secretly geeky, that's not the case. They're not flocking out to see Batman take on the Joker. They're flocking out to see if Heath's performance is as brilliant as they've heard, and "could it have possibly driven him to the sleeping/anxiety pills that played a role in his death?".

Our only REAL hope is that once these people see this film, it might change their mind about what comic books and super heroes are all about.

 

[Bat-Mite]

Since the film's on course to make half a billion in the US alone I'm surprised there are still people there who really think this.

At the very least i think one should appreciate the difference between the allure of watching a dead guy onscreen and watching batman take on the Joker. I'd suggest the latter is the real reason behind the success.

Anyway, most people are saying the potential Venom movie is "Dark knight envy" on Marvel's part, so perhaps we're already seeing the after effects of TDK.

Yeah, it's really quite pathetic if you ask me. Do these people really think there are that many people that are obsessed with celebrity? Heath did get a lot of new fans after Brokeback Mountain (myself included), but not enough to pack that much of a wallop at the box office. Nor do I think there are that many that are so morbidly obsessed with a celebrity's death that that's the only reason they went to see the movie, especially considering the fact that the movie came out half a year after he died. Joker has always been a huge moneymaker and the WB know this, which is why so much of the viral marketing revolved around him. Batman '89 wouldn't have been nearly as successful if Joker hadn't been the villain.

It didn't even have a buzz with the mainstream when it came out and he was still alive, not even with the fanbase with the first teaser or so so it built late momentum which all tied to his death.

Looks like somebody dropped off the face of the earth in December '07. Yes, Heath was still alive then, and yes, the movie was generating a lot of buzz due to the trailer/prologue. The first teaser was nothing but sound bytes played while the bat logo blew up on the screen, so there's no way that was ever going to generate a tremendous amount of buzz.

 

["V"]

To say that The Dark Knight is successful because of Heath Ledger's death makes the mind boggle. If you look at Heath Ledger's previous box office takings pre-Dark Knight I can't see where an extra $200 million worth of ticket sales could have come from.

It would be naive to say that it hasn't drawn in some viewers who wouldn't have been interested in the film beforehand, but I really don't believe it's had a major impact. This film had been generating interest for a long time before his death; Begins had done enough to convince the public that the days of Schumacher were long gone, and the fact that Joker - one of the most recognised characters in the world - was going to be starring in it automatically meant it was going to generate higher attendances than Begins.

Then there is the happy outcome that it's a great film; one that has largely appeased critics, fans, and regular folk who have then helped create a great word of mouth.

Iron Man made over $300 million dollars and no cast members died before that came out, and Batman is a far bigger character than Iron Man with an establised presence in cinema. It's really not hard to believe that the film has done so well by its own merits rather than the untimely demise of one of it's stars.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

yea exactly, even people in the slums of India and the mountains of Afghanistan probly know who Batman and The Joker are.

 

[Bads316]

The people who think TDK is successful because of Heaths death should wait and see how much money Dr Pannuthius (or whatever) makes. Nowhere near what this has done thats for sure.

Yes this movie is successful partly because of his great performance, but the oscar talk, and general buzz about Heath's Joker was up and running a long time before he died.

Bottom line is that if the film wasnt any good these arguments wouldnt exist or matter. Its simply a way of naysayers trying to attribute the films huge popularity to something other than its obvious class and quality.

 

[Shane Diesel]

I think Ledger's death was a factor on the opening weekend only. There's no question it directly pushed it into the $150 million range. I remember someone interviewed on CNN said Ledger's death probably accounted for $20-30 million more at the opening weekend BO and I agree. I think everyone was expecting a $110-130 opening weekend. But its continued success at the BO is b/c its a very good film and word of mouth.

 

[Buttman]

Good thread. I think the big change will be the way villains are portrayed in action films, with Joker becoming the new Hans Gruber and being knocked off in every action film for the next decade. The anarchist angle with a villain who cares for nothing but destruction is what I think producers will really steal for their next crappy blockbuster.

 

[The Guard]

A lot of the "daring" elements seen in THE DARK KNIGHT have been seen elsewhere. Therefore, I tend to think that while it was a good movie, THE DARK KNIGHT was influenced by other films more than other films will ever be influenced by it. The main difference between this movie and other superhero movies is that it incorporated a bit more psychology than most, but then, that's a staple of the Batman mythos.

 

[CristiMAN]

Taking the comic book seriously does pay off...

 

[hatebox]

A lot of the "daring" elements seen in THE DARK KNIGHT have been seen elsewhere. Therefore, I tend to think that while it was a good movie, THE DARK KNIGHT was influenced by other films more than other films will ever be influenced by it.

Well, we won't know how TDK influenced other films for many years to come really. It's been out less than a month, so both sides are just guessing right now.

 

[The Guard]

I just don't see which elements of TDK would directly influence other films. The elements that would be likely to are elements that, as I pointed out, have already existed in film, and even in superhero films, for years.

 

[JokesonU]

I highly doubt much of the hard work and thought that went into Dark Knight will influence other Hollywood projects. If anything, some filmmakers will jump on the IMAX bandwagon and use the IMAX technology to beef up their big scenes as well. And this will only continue to leave us with very empty & shallow action scenes.

Another possibility is that they think the audience wants 'dark!' Where it works for The Dark Knight, it doesn't necessarily translate to every single genre, super hero, film, etc.

All in all, it just seems that from all past successful films, Hollywood only seems to register that bigger is better, more money on CG, prettier stars with no talent, the longer the movie the more we'll feel like our money is more worth spent. Which, really isn't the case.

Dark Knight succeeded the way it did because you have a filmmaker who knows what he's doing and he not only respects the source material, but he has the right passion behind it. He also utilized a respectable group of performers and crew to bring that vision to life for us to enjoy.

If Nolan doesn't want to do a third, all the better! At least he knows he's exhausted his ideas and will leave it at that rather then do what Raimi did and just took the money and the fan's constant demand for another. Which doesn't necessarily always result in a great film.

 

[Odin's Lapdog]

But I think you're still confusing Ledger's death with Ledger's performance. The majority of people are seeing this movie because of word of mouth on how great he is as the Joker, not because it's his last full role. And that being the case, you have to say fair enough.

I'd also point out the hype for this movie was already very big before January. The full trailer debuted with I Am Legend in December and it was all the internet and just about everyone who saw it could talk about that month. And the vast majority of posters apprehensive of Nolan's Joker were suddenly far more excited on this board.

The hype was definitely there before Ledger's death, it wasn't suddenly created in the 6 months before TDK's release. Of course, headlines talking about ledger's passing also gave a tone of free press to TDK, but that would only account for a big opening weekend - not the tremendous legs it's displaying.

As for not warranting the amount of money it's making, well.. that's 100% subjective. My opinion is that TDK is by some distance the best comic book movie ever made so of course I'm going to think it deserves to be the biggest earner of the genre.

You can't separate his performance from his death, people are watching his great performance and feel tragic that he's passed away. It's all part and parcle of the same thing.

Oscar worthy only started getting thrown around after he died, people want to see if its that good (that's when real momentum for this film picked up). His performance personally didn't overshadow any one elses yet the press have jumped on the band wagon to focus solely on one aspect (relatively small in comparison to two face) to showcase the joker.

The only real hype that came from this film before ledger's death was from us fans, mainstream didn't really care that much about begins but were happy with the direction of it, infact out of everyone else i know, no one really watched begins in the first place.

being the best comic book film is not necessarily a big title because the genre is still separated out as comic book films and thus treated differently, the dark knight could be described as being a mainstream film and that may be a reason to appeal to its success. The entire genre would do better if treated in the same light however as a mainstream film, the dark knight wasn't THAT good which may kinda have us wondering why it is making as much as it is and that all comes down to what some call a great and tragic performance.

human beings love the great and tragic, it's what kept the work of shakespeare a consistency throughout all these centuries...I could make plenty of parallels between this level of interest and lady diana's death but i'd like to think it's fairly transparent.

 

[Odin's Lapdog]

Looks like somebody dropped off the face of the earth in December '07. Yes, Heath was still alive then, and yes, the movie was generating a lot of buzz due to the trailer/prologue. The first teaser was nothing but sound bytes played while the bat logo blew up on the screen, so there's no way that was ever going to generate a tremendous amount of buzz.

Dude, that was just on the internet, no one else cared. you don't get that much attention globally from internet buzz.

I mean let's look at it.

with regards to mainstream cinema, the dark knight doesn't break any boundaries, there have been dark gansta films throughout times, some with more complex story lines and even weirder villains. Even greater performances (silence of the lambs comes to mind). A lot of these films have been limited to certain age criteria so the first thing the dark knight does is open this film massively. it also gives younger people and a cult following a reason to go (superheroes).

Apart from this, there is nothing unique about the pacing or story telling or the psychological ride we are taken through. With regards to the genre its set in, yes but not to mainstream cinema.

so we need to establish where the money has come from. Has it come from cult and younger viewers being in awe of the variety/change in the genre or has it come by being an excepted piece of entertainment via the mainstream.

Personally it's a lil of both but it requires mass mainstream appeal.

So you ask, why does the mainstream audience adhere to something that doesn't necessarily break any story telling boundaries in their realm. The answer is oscar worthy powerful tragic performance.

The film is rewatchable because you get it as a film, you may need a second viewing to truelly apreciate it, another couple to see heath whether he's worthy of that oscar and another to try and delve into what he may have been going through during shooting. Each time the police unleash another piece of evidence about his death, the mainstream can take that new information and appreciate his performance in a new light knowing he had this/that/whatever going on.

A fair assessment would be to ask exactly how much money do you think has contributed to the total earnings of the dark knight in america via the media's consistent tragic reporting on heath and his oscar worthy performance. I'd definitely say over 100 million.

you can't forecast that, nor as a rival studio try to replicate a similar strategy for future films because unfortunatley that's the way the cookie rolls. Everybody got to stick to their own formulae.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

i hope it will mainly influence audiences to not put up with CGI fests that have no real SOULanymore. i don't have a problem with CGI as long as its used tastefully and appropriatly, theres no doubt it has revolutionised film-making in a good way. but when people like michael bay and co just throw a load of CGI at a action sequence instead of using their brains and planning a actual bonecrunching, complicated piece of art it just comes across as lazy. just think of all the hard work and meticulous planning that went into the chase sequence in TDK, and then look at some other movies where they are all running around in front of green screens, it shows who is really talented and deserving of the praise.

 

[hatebox]

You can't separate his performance from his death, people are watching his great performance and feel tragic that he's passed away. It's all part and parcle of the same thing.

That's quite a sweeping statement. I choose to believe that the majority of viewers (like myself) have the ability to separate the two entities. I'll grant you that it's inevitable that it does come into to play for a portion of viewers but I'd say it works the other way too: his death put his performance and the initial good reviews it garnered on a pedestal. I can't count the amount of reviews I've read that say yes, ledger does indeed live up to the hype in manner that makes the authors sound almost surprised.

The truth is I think a lot of critics and viewers were more than ready to pounce on Ledger's Joker if it were anything less than a tour de fource. However 99% them just can't do it because they genuinely believe he's that good.

Clearly we'll never know how much of difference Ledger's death made to TDK's Box office, and any arguments we have will end up being conjecture on both sides. I'd concede Ledger's passing got the ball rolling, but absolutely believe it was his performance (and the fact that, y'know, it's a good film) that sustained the equally impressive momentum.

I also believe that ultimately the Joker is a very real box office draw, and would be by whoever played him if he's played well. Batman Vs the Joker is the most iconic comic book battle ever, and that counts for a lot in this movie environment.

 

[Kaizer]

Problem is, its not us that will determine the effects of this, its Joe public. After I saw TDK again last weekend most people walking out around me were just complaining about the length and how they could of cut loads out!!!!! Fortunately for them I was unarmed at the time, why dont you look at the f%#@!&* run time before you go see it!!

I find it very funny hearing people complaining about the runtime, as it really isn't more than ten minutes longer than most other movies. What these people really are bothered by, is the sheer amount of information packed within the runtime of the movie, which is something they aren't used to. Had it been Lord of The Rings-length but still contained the same amount of information, people wouldn't complain. I don't say this often, but; lol.

 

[Odin's Lapdog]

the run time issue is probably because there are plenty of areas in the third act when you think it's going to end and it keeps going, making it seem even longer.

I didn't have any issues but was surprised when it kept going, especially after capturing the joker...

 

[Ace of Knaves]

i think it will influence hollywood, well i really really hope it does. TDKs action scenes just seemed more real and visceral, thats due to the practicality of it. plus i think a lot more directors will want to film in IMAX.

 

[Mangelo]

I think The Dark Knight, like Begins before it, will further make Hollywood executives understand that by putting their properties into the hands of competent filmmakers and writers, they can make a mint at the box office. If TDK had been directed by Paul W.S. Anderson, Michael Bay, or someone of similar talent (no offense to any admirers), it would still have made a couple hundred million $$$ at the box office. But in the hands of Nolan and Co., i.e. filmmakers who take the source material seriously and trust that the audiences have brains, this film is pushing the half billion $$$ mark. That's a trend I hope continues.

 

[Odin's Lapdog]

That's quite a sweeping statement. I choose to believe that the majority of viewers (like myself) have the ability to separate the two entities. I'll grant you that it's inevitable that it does come into to play for a portion of viewers but I'd say it works the other way too: his death put his performance and the initial good reviews it garnered on a pedestal. I can't count the amount of reviews I've read that say yes, ledger does indeed live up to the hype in manner that makes the authors sound almost surprised.

You can say this because you are looking at it in the eyes of the fan. If you ask anyone about the film who isn't, they say good story, joker was great, shame about heath. every single person who's watched it has said the same thing and it always ends on comments about heath's death. Every article about heath's death in the papers always mentions his dark knight performance. To the mainstream they are all tied together.

now i'm by no means bias but it's clear that death does shine a favoured light on people's perspective on things. heath's performance was good but not THAT good, he certainly didn't blow anyone apart from bale and maggie out of the water. oldman and eckhart held their own but how many oscars have you heard being called out for them? If his death didn't play a part, then the contributions of the other great acting shown would also be kept to parallel but they aren't.

The truth is I think a lot of critics and viewers were more than ready to pounce on Ledger's Joker if it were anything less than a tour de fource. However 99% them just can't do it because they genuinely believe he's that good.

Who is really going to pounce on the last performance of an actor who alot of people thought he was robbed during brokeback?

people weren't going to ever pounce of his performance, it was all going to be about nolan's direction with the character and where he would take them. Especially with those initial stills. But that was still fanboy criticism and not a reflection of the mainstream public

Clearly we'll never know how much of difference Ledger's death made to TDK's Box office, and any arguments we have will end up being conjecture on both sides. I'd concede Ledger's passing got the ball rolling, but absolutely believe it was his performance (and the fact that, y'know, it's a good film) that sustained the equally impressive momentum.

I also believe that ultimately the Joker is a very real box office draw, and would be by whoever played him if he's played well. Batman Vs the Joker is the most iconic comic book battle ever, and that counts for a lot in this movie environment.

fair enough but the thing is the joker only shares 3 scenes i believe with bats and with regards to mental battles, bats gets thrashed all the way through the film so it's not like the dark knight is the iconic hero/archvillain showdown.

 

[hatebox]

now i'm by no means bias but it's clear that death does shine a favoured light on people's perspective on things. heath's performance was good but not THAT good, he certainly didn't blow anyone apart from bale and maggie out of the water. oldman and eckhart held their own but how many oscars have you heard being called out for them? If his death didn't play a part, then the contributions of the other great acting shown would also be kept to parallel but they aren't.

Firstly, I would say Ledger's Joker is 'THAT good', but I appreciate that's simply my opinion vs yours. I'd also say that while not many people are calling for supporting actor nods for Eckart and Oldman, I've seen them get their dues in plenty of reviews, and definitely by a massive amount of fans.

Secondly, perhaps it comes down to the notion (which is again a subjective one) that for an actor the Joker is harder to pull off than Gordon or Dent, so if the consensus is that Ledger nailed it then most people are going to think he deserves the most credit of the three. And that appears to be what's happening, though all three are bing praised.

 

[Dr.Omega]

im already guessing were going to get alot of Joker "Knock offs" as villains

 

[DACrowe]

I think we need to be careful in differentiating the difference between influencing and borrowing concepts. It is true the success of BB led to the popular reboot concept used in Casino Roayle, The Incredible Hulk and others but I would not say Nolan's aesthetic or style has become standard. It is more a case of Hollywood sees something that is successful and copying it.

I honestly hope TDK has a similar influence that shows you need not follow studio formula and can ditch conventions like the black and white ending, the hero saving the girl, being kid-friendly, etc. and just focus on making good films that deliver entertainment while having interesting subtexts or at least a strong story to tell.

But I wouldn't want to see Spidey be like a Nolan Batman movie. But to abandon the formula? Sure. And keep in mind we're just talking blockbusters here.