Cool News
Producers Guild Of America Nominates THE DARK KNIGHT For Best Picture Of 2008!
Beaks here...
The Producers Guild of America (PGA) has named its five finalists for Best Moving Picture of 2008. Remember these titles:
THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON
THE DARK KNIGHT
FROST/NIXON
MILK
SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE
'Cuz you're going to be hearing these five movies rattled off again when the AMPAS announce their nominations for the 81st Academy Awards (on January 22nd). Okay, maybe DOUBT sneaks in there.
Still, the PGA noms are typically the most reliable predictor of what will make the cut for the top trophy at the Oscars. It's rare that they don't get four out of five. And while some may argue that THE DARK KNIGHT has the best chance at being the odd picture out, my instincts tell me that MILK is the one most at risk. That said, I thought these were the final five two months ago, and I'm sticking with 'em.
The PGA also awards excellence in televised programming. Here are the nominees for Best TV Comedy:
CURB YOUR ENTHUSIASM
ENTOURAGE
THE OFFICE
30 ROCK
WEEDS
As for Best TV Drama...
BOSTON LEGAL
DAMAGES
DEXTER
LOST
MAD MEN
Yes, the PGA is riddled with non-WIRE loving imbeciles, too.
The winners will be announced January 24th at a Motel 6 in Bakersfield.
-
+ Expand All
-
Jan 05, 2009 2:58:01 PM CST
Replace Benjamin Button with MY NAME IS BRUCE...
by dannyglovers_dickblood
...and I might watch the Oscars. Jesus Christ, Brad Pitt is a homo.
-
was kind of boring. Oh well
-
The Dark Knight, Curb Your Enthusiasm, The Office, Lost. Now if only there could be a way to unpull the wool over everyone's collective eyes with Benjamin Button.
-
and now your talking ..........
the darkcrap is the most over rated movie in years ............ -
Jan 05, 2009 3:03:01 PM CST
replace FROST/NIXON with THE WRESTLER and I actually agree
by leafy mcplantsalot
WALL-E was really good too.
-
for The Wrestler. And hopefully Slumdog goes in for the kill. Nolan and Ledger can collect on the Dark Knight's behalf. That would make me happy.
-
Why do I have to repeat myself?
-
That is all.
-
Sorry about the double post, but seriously, who cares what awards are given out. If you liked The Dark Knight who gives a shit if it gets nominated for awards or not? Does it make you like it any more or less than you did? Does the opinion of some fly by night organization like the Hollywood Foreign Press really matter? Fuck the Oscars. Fuck all these silly little award shows. How can you make art into a competition?
-
The Shield wins. I don't care if it's nominated or not.
-
"Although I will be dominated- Its an honor to be Nominated!" Robert Downey Jr. on the red carpet the year he went up for Chaplin
-
Is this where critical judgment has been hiding out on AICN? Ben Button is a fraud of a film. Contrived, hamfisted, and unforgivably dull. It has no business being on anyone's 'Best of' list. Jesus Christ, this has been a lousy year for movies.
-
will make getting a good/great third sequel even harder. chris may walk away from it. i think the only award dark knight should get is supporting actor.
-
By turning art into big business and then selling it to the highest bidder, I suppose.In the end, it doesn't really matter. People just like something to root for; something that will still look great through the rose-colored glasses of nostalgia.
-
The Wrestler should have the Best Film Independent Spirit Award pretty much locked down. I'd still like to see it nominated for an Oscar over Frost/Nixon though.
-
dont need no fuckin pga.
-
Am I the only person in the world who thought this film was just pretty good?
I seriously do not understand the overwhelming praise that this film is getting. -
But neither is Ben Button. I don't understand why this film resonates with so many people. My 5: Slumdog, Wrestler, Frost/Nixon, In Bruges, MILK. And if Let The Right One In could be eligible for an "at large" bid, it would replace MILK.
-
Maybe the greatest comedy since the old Billy Wilder days.
-
For one thing-- films stop being art about 50 years ago. And Art has always been a competitive endeavor whether the artists themselves will admit it or not.
-
Anything else would have been a joke.
-
This 'TDK' should get an Oscar talk bugs me. You need your opinions validated by the people who saluted crap for years?
-
Give Heath the little gold man so that the fanboys can finally come, but any other Oscars might be pushing it. Who the hell remembers the winners from year to year anyways?
-
My wife and I felt an odd sense of deja view when we watched Benjamin Button the other night.
What a rip-off. It's THE SAME SCRIPT! No way TCCOBB is worthy of an Oscar nod.
SO formulaic it's redonkulous. -
I think this is between The Dark Knight and Slumdog Millionaire.. however Oscar is Benjamin Buttom's to lose, and I think The Dark Knight has the best chance to upset, not Slumdog Millionaire, 'cause Boyle's has no stars in it, and normally the critical darling doesn't win.
-
doesn't need a nomination to win.
-
Damn You Korean Robocop Fried Chicken
-
for that alone he needs a posthumous award. hey guys, i liked dark knight too, and it's amazing a comic book movie has even been nominated...but was TDK and award winning experience? no. too flawed. bale's voice. dent's death...all the missing information between scenes..they say they cut nothing out but it sure felt like they did. it was not heat, it was not any godfather. it was just TDK and let's just be happy that it elevated the superhero genre, okay?and like i said, if this wins big, where does that leave us for pt 3? in disappointmentsville.
-
I think artists' work helps to inspire other artists' work: somebody does something so good you want to try to match it or top it. The Beatles and the Beach Boys had this kind of competition back in the 60s and it gave us Revolver and Pet Sounds and Sgt. Pepper and (eventually) Smile -- some of the greatest pop music ever recorded. That is a totally different concept than having a betting line in Vegas for who wins the Oscar or having the moronic entertainment media drones at E! or Access Hollywood pontificate about who the "winners" are going to be. Film is still art form regardless of douchebags like Tom Rothman try to do to it. Acting is an art. Writing is an art. Photography is an art. Danny Boyle is an artist. Roger Deakins is an artist. Tom Wilkinson is an artist.
-
If so, when?
-
just for looking better now then she did when she was 20
-
Heath's Joker best screen villain of all time? Get a grip.
-
The Scientologists are leading the boycott. Katie was fired for the "Tom proposed the weekend the Batman Begins opened" and stealing the headlines. (And yes she was fired.) Tom also sees Bale as a rival. The old-timers will nominate Doubt, the gay community will vote for Milk, meaning the crews, post production houses, and producers themselves will have to nominate TDK en masse to get it in for Best Picture. Heath may not even win Supporting Actor. I could see Tom Cruise winning for "Tropic Thunder" with that Scientology vote.----later----m
-
i think sometimes artists 'upping' each other is not intentional. it's like you said,Rev.Slappy, i think it's about inspiration. i think it's a constant pattern of inspiration and re-invention without totally being competitive. i mean, i know some competitive asshole artists, and they generally suck.the great artists i have seen, watched or know are their own worst critic. they just make what they like and are always surprised when it strikes chords in others. many times artists see the works of others and don't plan to 'out-do' it, but they are inspired to make something as meaningful for themselves- and sometimes that involves evolving or fine-tuning some things without purposely competing.it's man's design to try to take everything to the next level.what were we talking about?
-
Really, why? It was solid nothing more.
-
Just discovered this show, man is it great!
-
i got distracted and never got back to that point- if you read any film mags or polls, however, they all agree on it. was he the most interesting villain of the decade? i may have to say yes there anyway.
-
Benjamin Button was drivel. It's Oscar Bait. Oscar by numbers. A boring film done by the studio that's every bit as formula trite as the action films they release in the summer. But it failed. It tries to be Forrest Gump (as many have said) but it's a terribly pale and tedious imitation. It's very hard to root for such a passive protagonist and scenes that were supposed to have heavy emotional weight (I knew because the score told me it was A POWERFUL SCENE) fell flat on their arses. Nominating this for a Best Picture oscar discredits the Oscars and reveals them, once again, as For Sale bullshit.
-
FX re-ran the first season towards the end of the year though.
-
Entourage..would someone please explain the love for this show? I liked the first couple of seasons, now, feh. Piven is funny..ummmmmmm..ummmmmmm. Insert Pushing Daisies, or heaven fucking forbid, Its Always Sunny In Philadelphia, in its place.
-
Now that the afterglow is gone, can we please take a look at TDK for what it is? At best TDK is a mediocre action/super hero movie with a stunningly brilliant performance by Ledger. If you take the Joker out of the movie, or focus on any part of the movie he is not in, TDK is reduced to below average at best. The Batman voice, the horrible pacing, the ridiculous boat scene, and on and on. Nominating Ledger for best actor makes sense, nominating the movie as BP is absurd.
-
The reason you probably don't see the genuinely beautiful humanistic angle of regular people triumphing using an interesting plot device is the same reason THX fooled most that the Dark Knight actually had weight, but on second viewing minus the theater sound setup lets you truly understand its lack of substance. The child covered in shit with the autograph signed versus the COMIC BOOK re-inforced character with NO SOUL plus the morbid fascination with his dead counterpart crashing into an SUV like a rock. Which one inspires you more? Reality or fiction?
-
i can think of several other good shows that got the boot on HBO i would rather watch. so there's some upcoming babe worked into almost evry episode..big deal. what are ya? in 9th grade?
-
Really? Where the hell were you guys (i.e. TDK haters) when the movie was out in the theaters? I love these johnny-cum-lately party crashers who think their opinion on TDK is the "correct" one.Fuck off, all of ya.Denny Crane.
-
Just because Button didn't make you cry like a baby doesn't mean it's not a good film. Fincher deliberately made it less sentimental than other weepers like Gump. Button's themes of nothing lasts, the cycle of life through generations, and how short all our lives are is what resonates. And the fact it is a downright beautiful movie.
-
You can say Dark Knight sucks all you want, but that doesn't make it true. You might as well shout at the sky that it's not blue and see who wins that argument.
-
Any of you a-holes that think TDK is not great and flawed, know this: The proof of its greatness is that it will be remembered 50 years down the road, and every other movie this year will be a distant memory.
-
like everyone else.
-
Benjamin buttons was fantastic. What movies should be. great. that and slumdog are my top 2
-
that's the only reason the very average TDK is on the list.
-
You won't see that flick taking in any meaningful awards. Maybe some "best gray building street design in a movie shot in Illinois" half-Oscar, but nothing of actual value. Accept it.
-
The two best shows in their respective categories and they get no nominations. Hell, even this fucktarded site doesn't even do a CHUCK talkback. The industry is being run by morons.
-
Prop 8 anyone?
*Cough*Homophobes*Cough*
And seriously, if the only "flaws" you can find in DK are Batman's voice and you didn't like Dent dying, then stop watching movies, cos you ain't never gonna be happy. -
I saw the opening scene of this and goddamn she looks good naked for an 80 year old. I stopped there though cuz I also saw Phillip Seymour Hoffman's ass and that's an image I'll take to my grave.
-
The Producers Guild votes it in because of the money it made, it's what producers do. The Academy could also but in this case not a definite.
-
...and I actually think it's a better film than TDK on just about every level. TDK was fine, but it had so many flaws that I just can't get past. IRON MAN is also much more fun.
-
You say that as though WE'RE in the minority.
-
Broke new ground for a dark, gritty take on a dark, gritty comic? What about V For Vendetta? All that AND Natalie Portman. If I wanna watch Heat, I'll watch Heat. If I wanna see a good Batman flick, I'll pop in Batman Begins. I could watch 3 hours of Wayne tinkering with the Batsuit and remodeling the Batcave (sorely missed in TDK)rather than TDK again. I liked TDK a lot. But not as much as Batman Begins. This does not make me a "hater" (god PLEASE somebody kill these overused, ghetto tweenybopper words). You loved TDK. Fine. I just didn't love it as much as you did, sorry.
-
Damn You Michael Bay
-
The Academy loves the gays and the disabled. If they screened a MILK/I AM SAM double feature to the Academy I think their heads would explode.
-
You think a machined effort rolled fresh of the assembly line that panders low is better than a work of art that aims high? I guess in your world Stan Lee is a better artist than da vinci.
-
nominates Benjamin Button for biggest, steamiest pile of shit of the year. One of the worst movies of the year. Why does every jackass critic seem to like it? Was there a scene I missed where a magician comes out and hypnotizes the audience into taking another one up the ass?
-
Jan 05, 2009 4:27:16 PM CST
Am I the only one who wants geeky shit to remain disreputable?
by thecontinentalop
Fuck the mainstream. You can keep your Oscars. Not that Dark Knight deserves one, unless they give them out for Most Overrated Motion Picture In Human History.
-
No way should Benjamin Button be considered one of the top 5 films of the year. I enjoyed it. It was a nice enough date movie. But, man was it cloying. The similarities with forest gump were too much to ignore - it's basically forest gump 2: oscar bait. You've got history passing through the eyes of the simple outsider, fathers who can't be dads, boat cap'n pals, the box of chocolates like saying (I can't remember it, something like "you never know what's comin") ... Some things worked for me - esp. the short love story with Tilda Swinton. And I liked the overall arc with Cate Blanchett. But man, the humming bird showing up after the fantastic humming bird story.. twice - it was like being hit on the head with an anvil... twice - and the too cute lightning stiking the old guy 7 times. Overall it's decent, but it's really meant for people who like their sodas light on the soda, heavy on the syrup. I'm not sure Dark Knight deserves top five either (maybe) but it's definitely better, and more original, than Benjamin Button. Shame too, cause I was hoping for more given all the praise it's received.
-
it could have been batman and fucking robin, but it wasnt. It was THE best super hero movie of ALL TIME - there are no doubts about it. Nolan did the genre and the character right - i could give 2 fucks if it wins any awards
-
posed on these boards and just tell all the TDK haters to suck it. The rest of us will just enjoy watching awards' season even more.
-
Jan 05, 2009 4:34:00 PM CST
Why is Curb on this list? The last new season was 2007
by coughlins laws
Do they have some wierd time frame I'm unaware of? I don't get it. Well, can't comment becuase I've only seen one of these movies and The Dark Knight loses its awe factor when not seen in a movie theatre. It also makes you wonder even more why Bruce Wayne and Harvey Dent would both be vying for such an ugly broad like Maggie Gylenhaal. Katie Holmes left alot to be desired as an actor and was as believable a Assistant D.A. as Keanu Reeves was an FBI Agent, but at least I can understand why guys would want to fuck her. Can't figure that out with Maggie. The more times I watch that movie the bigger a distraction she is. Plus, I haven't seen The Wrestler yet but I would love to see Mickey Rourke accepting an Oscar just so I can watch his wierd looking face while he's crying and wondering why he doesn't have Bruce Willis's carreer since he stole his act...
-
Jan 05, 2009 4:34:08 PM CST
Dancingforever, Reckoner :Laymen Criticism versus Esoteric Story
by noncents
You don't have the actual pedigree or level of filtering as elevated minds. Not everyone does. That is why MORONS lead this country, because the sophisticated minds with their cultured palettes and intrinsic digestion are far and few between. Equality is the problem, hence the weight of a thousand imbeciles versus the shining wisdom of one lunatic. The quest is for the lunatic to spread light as far as he can on the sheltered and narrow-minded of the many. TDK had Ledger in glimpses of subdued brilliance, but the rest of it was SO SO, drawn out, and epic in its tedium.
-
suck on that!
-
Jan 05, 2009 4:44:17 PM CST
Careful Noncents, 'epic tedium' doesn't usually sit well
by mattmanreturns
with the moronic masses. If we were talking about a Michael Bay movie, I might be more sympathetic to your argument, but it doesn't really apply to a movie as complex as Dark Knight. A movie that wasn't all about explosions, yet bored you to tears.
-
The Dark Knight did. First of all, I think it was a huge mistake making Jeff Bridges character evil from the very beginning. I accept that he turned on Tony Stark once Stark made that irrational press conference causing their company to plummet in the stock market. However, halfway through the movie we find out that he really wasn't a father-figure to Stark after he died and was in fact an evil fucker all along who ordered a hit on him by these radical terrorists. Then, at the very end, I just don't understand what his plan was. Why didn't he just kill Stark? Why let him live after confessing everything to him? Why did he all of the sudden turn into a Bond Villain? And once the secret was out, even if he killed Stark, what the fuck was his plan then? All of the authorities would have know what he'd done. So what exactly was his plan? It mad no sense. To me, it took away from the brilliant first 2/3rds to how they ended it...
-
Jan 05, 2009 4:49:30 PM CST
The one thing I really DID respect about Iron Man, though
by coughlins laws
was that they had the balls to actually make Islamic Terrorists villains. Most movies these days avoid this like the plague. It seems like every group, save Nazis or US Government officials, is off limits now. Look at that ridiculous Ben Affleck/Jack Ryan movie where the turned the bad guys from Islamic Terrorists to Neo-Nazis!!!! Yeah, they've gone from fisticuffs and and knife-fights to hijacking nuclear bombs in order to trick the US and Russia to start World War 3. Very plausible plot points in order to avoid "offending" Muslim Terrorists...
-
Because it ain't going to win shit outside some audio awards. I was entertained by TDK as much as the next guy, but for fuck's sake it ripped off more movies than a Tarantino flick.
-
TDK is like our first blowjob, everything else you loved before just seems lame and uninteresting after that. Ironman was a cute little superhero movie, but it seems so by-the-numbers and quaint after TDK. thats not to knock Ironman, but TDK changed things. Marvel has to srep up now and make more complex movies. no more generic origin stories.
-
MattmanReturns:? Explain to me the complexities exhibited by the TDK narrative.
Coughlin: Iron Man had more plot holes filled by exposition heavy dialogue then could be counted, the emotional degree of no reality, but a like-able performance of a much loved Downey. The tech saturated gadgetry also gave it points, but the Jeff Bridges ending was a disaster. -
Granted, Ledger's performance was tremendous (It is a monumental tragedy that such a dynamic performer is gone). But there were other great performances such as Aaron Eckhart, Morgan Freeman, Gary Oldman, Eric Roberts, Monique Curnen (Det. Ramirez) and Tommy Lister (the TATOOED PRISONER) just to name a few.TDK was a movie that had strong, pivotal performances from both major and "minor" characters -- from Ledger to Lister. Bottom line is that basically everybody knocked it out of the park IMHO.
-
dumbass. Ironman was about a guy who built a kickass suit of armor in a cave. i like good, stupid, blow up shit real good stuff, too, but dont try to convince me Ironman was anywhere near as complex a movie as TDK. The characters in TDK exibited far more depth, for one.
-
I thought Iron Man was just flat out more entertaining to watch. Has nothing to do with hating TDK's success. Heath Ledger should get a best supporting actor nod, though, most definitely, I dunno how you could disagree on that.
-
Ok, sure the Dark Knight was not without its shortcomings. Everyone and their mother has admitted to finding Bale's voice to be a little much. In spite of this, it's been almost universally regarded as one of the best films of the year. Instead of bitching about how bad DK was, how about coming up with 5 films this year that were better? The fact of the matter is regardless of what wins or gets nominated, Dark Knight will be the movie that outlasts them all (with the possible exception of Wall-E_).
-
i meant that for someone else. ignore the last thing.
-
they use calendar 2008 for movies; they use the Emmy schedule of June 1, 2007 to May 31, 2008 for TV.
-
How emotional and angry these people(for who TDK changed their lives)are getting when other people are just stating differing opinions. Okay, some of the Non TDK Zealots are getting a few jabs in there, too. Makes me want to avoid the theatres at all if there is a third one. I knew TDK was going to spawn a new religion when, while watching it in the theatre, Heath whips off his clown mask, says his "makes you stranger" line, and the couple next to me both shot their arms in the air like they were at a rock concert.
-
Jan 05, 2009 5:08:10 PM CST
So award are what is taken to confirm TDK fans beliefs it's a gr
by ribbitking
TDK doesn't suck, but it's no where near Batman Begins.
-
Most of them are just talkers who get the financing going. Not to say that there aren't some with good instincts or taste but those are rare exceptions.
Wait for the Oscar issue of EW and read what the anonymous producer had to say. They're usually talking from a warm cozy place clear up their ass. -
someone said Heath ledger's performance was 'stunningly brilliant'... wow... just wow
-
I didn't say the movie confused me. It's a morally complex and intricately plotted movie.
-
TDK was much better than that. Sorry. TDK wasn't a bad movie, but it just wasn't as good as the hype and mass-hysteria made it seem. I haven't been able to watch the movie all the way through at this point after the initial viewing at the THX birthplace known theater. Hopefully, time will go by, and soon I will give it another chance. But for now, it wasn't that great.
-
it was the greatest comic book movie of all time, and the only reason that is true is because the way comic books movies have been handled until The Dark Knight, was with kiddie-hands and elaborate characterizations. So, comparatively speaking, it opened up the doors to what is possible in character range and depiction. I got caught up in what it meant. That comic book movies could have grit and realism. And Ledger's performance was subdued brilliance and it's not because of his death, but because of the subtleties that weren't over-the-top, but realistic to the mind of the "true joker." I collected batman comics when I was 9 years old and the joker that Ledger gave us wasn't the characterization cartoon variety given in cartoons and previously by J.N. It spoke more truth to the source material.
-
Unlike Batman Begins, which I grew to like more on repeat viewings, I think the Dark Knight is likely to go the other way. On home viewing it did not hold up well... I found it a joyless experience, tediously dark and yet totally unmoving. I thought it was good in theaters, and I still think it's a good movie, but it's a long way from great or a favorite of mine now.
-
All this whining about the Batman voice, too dark and brooding, too morose...and yet this is what is also being praised about the movie. I'd take Bale growling as Bats any day over all the actors' dialogue combined from "Batman and Robin."
Iron Man DID have better eye candy in some of its deleted scenes, but the Academy doesn't generally award that.
-
nt nuff said
-
"Aiming high" does not make TDK a work of art, just as being entertaining doesn't make IRON MAN "pandering." IMO, IRON MAN made its point better, in a more entertaining way. TDK was a bit self-important, and the themes got muddled in the storytelling. I still liked the movie well enough (and I had problems with IRON MAN), but it's reputation has been inflated for various reasons.
-
Talkbackers will never be happy. Constantly moaning that films such as these are never treated with respect - not since Donner's Superman they all say.
Finally we have a masterpiece of a film, based off a comic book, with amazing performances, an intelligent story, the right amount of action and characters and source material treated with the greatest respect. What do you all say? "Teh suck". -
TDK "haters" and "fanatics" alike (I don't really think there are amny of either really), the milestone status of the film regardless of whether one thinks its a good movie, or great movie, or greatest movie ever?
The fact that a superhero film is even being considered by the haughty echelons of the industry as a possible contender for this year's most notable accolades is a pretty big achievement for us genre geeks and snobs no matter how you cut it. -
"wondering why he doesn't have Bruce Willis's carreer since he stole his act..."
did you mean bruce willis stealing his act? because rourke had been a star before...then bruce took his style, IMO.oh and also, i agree with someone else there were other fine performances in TDK...i could watch and listen all day to morgan freeman reading the back of a shampoo bottle while he fucks my girlfriend- the man is the best in the business. alfred was way better this time around, eckhardt was totally believeable in what would be ridiculous turns of emotion from anyone else....but eric roberts? eric roberts was a joke that brought down every scene he was in mugging up his 'goombah' schtick annoyingly and unconincingly. everyone else disappeared, but eric was just eric cashing a check. and i like eric. just not in TDK. why don't you slo-mo and look at his face in some of the scenes with the joker at the meeting. he is either totally reactionless, or ridiculously aping surprise. -
I'm just stunned when i read shit like that. I would write for about 2 days straight on why Dark Knight sucked if i thought it deserved my sanity.
-
Best film of the year but another victim of the stigma that is the unwritten law of animation being classed as a kids-only genre! If film is merely a story enacting a series of moving images with or without sound, then Wall-E is the finest and most flawless example of that definition from conceptions to execution. I'm a Huge Batman fan and I rejoice in Nolan finally making Batman the way it should have been after so many years of crap from Burton and Schumacher; but Wall-E is the most artistic expression of visual narrative, cinematography, original conception and emulated virtual camera work that has ever been delivered in an animated movie and deserves just award for such outstanding achievements!
-
The greatness of that movie lies in the writing. Should it be nominated, probably not. Still worth seeing though.
-
Jan 05, 2009 5:59:20 PM CST
TDK IS OVERRATED & FUCKING GAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
by illuminate
The Dark Knight is overrated.
Reasons:
1. Batman Returns is Darker
2. Batman 89 had a better, truer Joker. (with all respect towards Heath Ledger and it was not his fault since, Nolan probably removed the exploding marbles and humor). You can still have a raging psycho-killer through exploding marbles and have cool gadgets and be funny but, Nolan removed that.
The movie is good, I watched it in Theaters and rented it. But, I did not buy it since, it is not on the level of a masterpiece.
The Dark Knight was boring at times.
Also, why is everyone who ever made a Batman movie a fagget from hell. There has never been a sexy woman in Batman:
1. Batman 89: Basinger looks like my librarian.
2. Batman Returns: Pfeifer is dressed like a dirty hooker with a sown up costume. I know it was part of the idea of catwoman but, still.
3. Batman Forever: Well, Kidman was partialy sexy but, she was only a half boner maker.
4. Batman and Robin: Bat-girl was over-weight and Batman had a sexy costume than than Poison Ivy.
5. Batman Begins: Tom Cruise's fuck hole is sexy but, she was also dressed like a librarian.
6. The Dark Knight: Jake G. sister looks like someone hit her in the face with a frying pan. I have seen photos on the internet of her great big boobs but, you will never see any form fitting or sexy wardrobe on anyone in a batman film.
Why?
Because everyone making them are faggets who are to busy sucking each other dicks to give a shit.
Don't give me that pg-13 bullshit either. Jerry Bruckhiemer always has sexy women in his films from the half naked chick in King Arthur to all that cleavage in National Treasure. Don't get me wrong, I am NOT saying those are better movies. I am just saying that every single person who has made a Batman film is fucking gay.
-
I enjoyed Iron Man, but come on people, Jnr was just playing himself with a super suite and don't get me started on the final 1/3 of the flick.
-
And turn YMCA off.
-
replace darknight with IronMan
by JeanLuc Dickhard
and now your talking .......... the darkcrap is the most over rated movie in years ...
))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
I love these kind of people. Think it is so cool to hate things. You will hear the words overrated come from them on just about anything that is #1 and they will always be there bitching. As if their opinion actually means something more. As good a movie as TDK is this guy will probably never like it just to make his point to people who don't give a damn. Keep it real man, as cool as Iron Man is, TDK is still pretty damn top notch. -
and i'd say the list was solid.
-
HAHA, you did not buy the movie because it is not on the Level of a masterpiece? Man, remove the stick from your ass quick and save yourself. Your noes is pointing way to high as well yet I don't see much up there.
-
Still movie picks seem pretty much standard. But no freakin' Battlestar Galactica, the best damn show on TV? And nada for the Shield?! Well, here's hoping that Weeds (which is pretty damn hilarious, please recall Kevin Nealon self-asphyxiating arousal while monkey spanking) and Dark Knight OR Frost/Nixon win (haven't seen the others so can't judge yo).
-
that you can see cptain americas shield in BENJAMIN BUTTON?
-
that fellow who always has chili for lunch? have not heard from him in awhile.
-
I know everyone hopped on the Wall-E express, but Kung Fu Panda was about a kung fu using panda! Garbage robot who loves another robot that says Wall-E a lot or master of kung fu action comedy animation-style? As always, a matter of opinion, but me likey Kung Fu Panda betta. Jack Black was perfecto for the role and hell the fight scenes were actually riveting.
-
I love you. And Illuminate can suck a dick. I know you really want to. Only a latent homosexual could project so overtly.
-
I love listening to some of these little pisant talkbackers try to sound tough. They make me laugh. If Matrix were here, he'd laugh too.
-
If you really think this movie is similar to Gump then I can't believe you actually watched it. If you look at an outline with no knowledge of the film itself then there are obvious similarities, but the themes and ideas Fincher worked with in Button completely eclipse the pedantic Gump. I guess it's another case of "I didn't get it, so it must suck!" Of course this site is filled with pretentious simpletons, and you won't admit that maybe you didn't get what Fincher was saying, but if you thought it was similar to Gump, then the proof is in the puddin'...
-
Am I right, or what?!
-
Jan 05, 2009 6:43:27 PM CST
"Button" = Pitt gazing silently through make-up for 3 hours.
by flim springfield
-
but it's been looking bleak. Hopefully this is a good sign.
-
for lunch.
-
I disagree with the lists 'cause every year there is going to be personal favs that don't make it.
Although I have a hard time understanding why THE WIRE can't seem to get any love. -
Well...by judging it and awarding a prize to the winner, I'd assume.
-
Jan 05, 2009 7:03:12 PM CST
I think Frost/Nixon is the odd one that maybe won't make the cut
by mrfloppy
But YEAH, you all TDK haters... that's a BIG OWNED.
And yeah too for LOST. -
is better that TDK. It airlifted cranky-Bond into Syriana and blew shit up. The tits, I tell you. Where's the Bond-love?
-
that cant handle the idea of someone having a different opinion than theirs. and your narrow minded pea-brain lumps them all together. people disagree. its never going to stop, so get used to it, or be a condescending prick your whole life.
-
wasn't as complex as TDK, but it was better. I suppose we have to reward the broody atmosphere and timely moral/political ambiguity that TDK groans at us, but I'll take the poppy wiseassery of Iron Man just about any day.
-
I really loved it and Langella's Nixon easily won me over, but the fact that they had to inflate the importance and drama of what happened bugs me. Particularly the most memorable scene in the movie which was totally fabricated...
-
Personally, I think that TDK is as effective as Batman Begins and not much better--it just had a different central focus. BB was a character study of Wayne as a tortured soul; TDK was a well-constructed crime drama. Both had their strong points, and both had their respective flaws.
Although, I will say that the one thing TDK did extremely well was how they made a coherent screenplay (except for the boat scene), picking the best story and character bits from a half century of Batman mythos. Nolan took stuff from Long Halloween, DKR, and Killing Joke. . .and he made a working script and movie from it. Kudos to him.
The one thing from this list, btw, that makes me geek out is seeing Dexter on there. FUCK YES, IT'S ABOUT TIME. Dexter is constantly unappreciated by just about everybody; and though this season got off to a pretty slow start, it reached the epicness of Season 1. God, Dexter is too good. -
Jan 05, 2009 7:24:33 PM CST
"The Dark Knight" was a masterpiece, but it won't win...
by leafar the lost
...the best picture Oscar due to being a comic book movie. Bullshit! Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker deserves an Oscar, and the assholes at the Academy should be forced to give it to him in death! I have bought TDK, and I have seen it 6 times now. Ledger's performance is still amazing! I have noticed all the little things he was doing. If an actor literally gives everything he has to performance, then he fucking deserves an Oscar. Fuck you if you don't vote for him.
-
Just simple as that. AICN was always about hate and everything over and over again. First love, then hate, just to look cool and alternative. Fuck you.
Now Producers Guild is not relevant (you said the opposite a few weeks ago, when you thought it won't be nominated).
Well, I predict in a few weeks, Directors, Actors and Writers Guilds won't be relevant too. Stupid industry... how the dare to pretend they know better than us, the mainstream... -
Jan 05, 2009 7:28:58 PM CST
zombot.com, I meant Bruce Willis stole Rourke's shtick
by coughlins laws
Maybe my sentence structure was wrong. No, I agree that Rourke had a lot going for him in the 80's and was one of the best actor's of his generation. Yet somehow he was flat broke by the time he did Angel Heart and along comes little Brucie Willis, fresh off fluff women's programming on TV, who looks alot like him and talks like him and nails Die Hard by playing Mickey Rourke and becomes one of the biggest stars in Hollywood over the next decade or so while the Mick crashes and burns and does a Michael Jackson on his face. I do feel a little sorry for him but it must really suck. He could be the one going water skiing with Ashton Kutcher and the kids...
-
Jan 05, 2009 7:40:22 PM CST
No, the point is about these Dark Knight haters is they
by coughlins laws
are, as usual, just trying to be against the crowd. OK, I understand if you weren't blown away like alot of other people were. But, it wouldn't have made the money it did without alot of repeat business. The vast majority of people who saw it loved it. I admit, some of the luster is not gone since I've seen it at home. I thought it was great but now just think it's really good. I don't think it's a movie I can watch over and over again. It's too dark and depressing. But, anyone who is calling it shit is just trying to get a reaction. As far as Iron Man goes, I think it's the best Origin Story yet told for a Comic Book Movie. But, if the Third Act is a sign of things to come, I think the sequels are in trouble. I never read Iron Man and had only a broad familiarity with it, but from what I could dig up online, his Rogue's Gallery is even weaker than the Hulk's and I don't see how Favs will make Mandarin that interesting. It looks to me that Iron Man, like Superman, is just too powerful of a character...
-
To me it's like this: some movies almost seem like they're created for the Oscars - Crash, Button, Doubt and other movies are made just to be made - like TDK. It'd be nice to see TDK get an Oscar nod, because I get tired of the "oscar-oriented" movies at the end of the year. Just a regular movie that happens to be great.
-
nominated? I admit, I haven't seen it. I know alot of people love it and it got very marks from the tomatoes. But, if all the first half of the movie is slapstick from cartoon robots, well, I don't think that can hold my attention. I mean if alot of you people hate Dane Cook's act because he incorporates physical comedy into his stand-up, why are you entertained by robots bouncing around the screen for an hour and a half with little to no dialogue?
-
I think Wall-E deserves a nomination for best pic. The sad thing is there are many people who will never see this movie (since they don't have kids).
-
you can't see The Wrestler or Slumdog Millionaire yet. I still want to see that Clint Eastwood movie, though...
-
You're SEVERELY misguided about your preconceptions of Wall-E. Granted, I don't love it as much as the Brad Bird Pixar films (and don't think it deserves a Best Pic nom over TDK), but it's a GREAT film. If you ever do get around to seeing it you'll see how different it is from your expectations.
-
i agree- i had preconceived notions of what wall-e was by the trailers. i bought it unseen, and it was the best $20 or so i have spent in a while. it is totally not a kids movie. it is classic sci-fi with a message. wall-e's sad adventures on the deserted earth are heart wrenching. kids can enjoy the buster keaton slapstick and cute characters, but wall-e is so beyond a kid's movie. you will be floored, you will be moved.that said, i kind of wish the last portion was left off. once humans start talking, the movie loses it's edge. shame the whole thing couldn't be silent in a way. the fat lazy humans should have lost the ability to speak, only listen to what the advertising programs told them.
-
Jan 05, 2009 8:25:13 PM CST
The first half of Wall-E is Chaplin-esque, not slapstick.
by flim springfield
If the second half was as good as the first, Wall-E would be the hands-down best movie of the year, no contest.
-
bad movie
-
The Dark Knight does not deserve a Best Picture nod by anybody or any organization...by any stretch of the furthest and wildest imagination. Hello, "The Fix" is in!!! Talk about stretching the truth, even Stretch Armstrong is laughing at this nomination. This is just the rich guys protecting their own for money reasons.
-
Fanboys. Funny.
-
Jan 05, 2009 8:43:32 PM CST
I WOULD TAKE OUT BUTTON, FROST/NIXON, MILK AND SLUMDOG
by bringingsexyback
and put in Mamma Mia!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lysKRN-cdg0&feature=related -
But it is no best picture, it is just an action movie and has no more depth than one. The Wrestler should be in its place.
-
Great insight, fella.
-
Jan 05, 2009 8:51:10 PM CST
COUGHLINS - SHUT YOUR FUCKING PIE HOLE AND MAKE MY DINNER
by bringingsexyback
Bitch
-
Jan 05, 2009 8:53:12 PM CST
COUGHLINS - OBVIOUSLY YOU'VE NEVER SEEN SUPERMAN THE MOVIE
by bringingsexyback
If you think Iron Man was the greatest origin movie. What's on the menu tonight?
-
Jan 05, 2009 8:54:10 PM CST
IRON MAN WAS KEPT FROM BEING GREAT BY ITS SOUNDTRACK
by bringingsexyback
It needed a Williamesque soundtrack, not something Michael Bay would've used.
-
I'm pissed.
-
Everything except him fucking my wife. I draw the line there, but I caught the last 25 minutes or so of Shawshank the other night and damned if Freeman's narration didn't bring tears to my eyes. No one does voiceover like him.
-
*in Batgrowl* "Quack quack!!!!"
-
Just because we didn't have enough pretentious celebrities spewing their personal politics in 08.
-
Willis did not steal Rourke's shtick. The only true parallel between the two is that they looked alike before Rourke messed his face up, and Bruce Willis is a year older than him so technically Bruce had it first.
-
I think Slumdog gets left out and replaced with doubt. It's a great film, but it might be more of a foreign film to the academy voters.
For all the Entourage hate, this season was a return to form for that show. But Weeds was terrible after the first couple episodes. Replace it with It's Always Sunny.
And get rid of Boston Legal and replace it with The Wire. -
Coughlins, you are an idiot - as has been well established. Willis was a spectacular light comedian with impeccable comic timing. Rourke was a brooding 'James Dean' Brando type. Moonlighting was not some chick flick for TV. It had broad based appeal among men and women, which allowed Bruce to capitalize (after some awful misfires) with Diehard. Diehard came out of nowhere. Willis was not expected to be able to pull off action hero. Rourke would have been a fish out of water in that role. It called for snappy patter as well as heroics. Rourke never possessed that type of charm or comic timing, or even action hero status. You are just dead wrong on that comparison.
-
Jan 05, 2009 9:29:25 PM CST
All right, I'll break down and watch WALL-E, but if I don't like
by coughlins laws
I'll blame some the people in this room, and for that, there will be no forgiveness. As far as Willis being older than Rourke, that's true but Rourke made it as an actor much earlier than Willis. When diner came out Willis was still a bartender. And I'm not knocking Bruce. I like alot of his movies. I think he's on a "One good movie, Three bad movie" cycle right now but he can raise to the ocassion most of the time when it's needed. As far as Superman The Movie, my old buddy sexyback, I think overall it was a better movie than Iron Man and holds up surprisingly well today. But, I think the origin aspect of Iron Man was much more interesting and fun to watch than what happened to Clark Kent, Peter Parker, or Bruce Banner. The first 45 minutes or Batman Begins were great but that movie made it appear as if him actually being batman was tacked on. So, therefore, I still stand by what I said (or typed, rather). The Tony Stark becoming Iron Man is the best origin story put on film yet seen.
-
I just got done watching it 20 minutes ago... what's the big deal? It's good, but how does it make the top spot on anyone's list? I can understand Top 10 (not for me) maybe, but #1? I don't get it.
-
The first half was somewhat cute, but slow. It wa never a laugh riot though, unlike what the trailers would have you believe. The second hal was mediocre atr best. Cute movie overall, not bad, but no where near Pixar's best, or years best at that.
-
Jan 05, 2009 9:48:31 PM CST
Yeah, I'd be dead wrong, toadkiller, if Bruce Willis didn't
by coughlins laws
say he was influenced by Mickey Rourke. As far as Moonlighting, for a guy to admit they liked that is akin to them admitting today that they watch Grey's Anatomy. Plus, I don't believe you were even around in the 80's. At the time, Mickey Rourke was on the verge of superstardom. He was critically and commercially successful in alot of movies and was about to go to the top of the list of male stars. He could have had a career closer to Tom Cruise or Kevin Costner's if he didn't piss it away. However, his personal life and inability to behave on a movie set caused him to stupidly turn down parts in Rain Man, The Untouchables, Platoon, Beverly Hills Cop, and 48 Hours. So, before you start calling me an idiot, do some research. Before 1988, Mickey Rourke starred in and was offered hit movie after hit movie while Bruce Willis was only known for a CHICK SHOW (Moonlighting's Will they or won't they kept many men on the edge of their seats!!!) As usual, I think you're lying and aren't even old enough to have seen Moonlighting...
-
My Name Is Bruce was shot on a shoestring Budget in Craptown, Oregon!!!
When's the last time you ever made a movie for Peanuts? Huh?
Answer: Never!!!
You, Sir, with Respect, are a what's termed in the Military-A Bitch.
Happy Holidays,
-mlb =^-^=
-
I like Bruce Willis. However, mickey Rourke was a successful actor long before Bruce and many people at the time touted their similarities. I didn't just pull that out of thin air. Bruce consciously imitated Mickey Rourke early in his carreer and has admitted as much. What some of you youngens (i.e.-under 30) don't realize is that Mickey Rourke was synomynous with COOL in the mid 80's. I think Bruce was a more professional actor and was able to get alot of parts they probably would have offered Rourke in the 90's and beyond before he flaked out...
-
"One Missed Call" !!!
And you all need to STFU about Batman Whatever-It was only slightly better than
"One Missed Call"
And by the way, sometimes, (you know actors are people too) need to pay the bills!
This is why they should all strike-RIGHT NOW!
Final note-Since when do those humps at Rotten tomatoes decide which movies suck?!?
Huh?
What's that?
Answer Me!
:-)
Lols to the droogs on AICN
Peace out!
-MLB -
Jan 05, 2009 10:00:16 PM CST
Really? I had such high expectations for "One Missed Call"
by coughlins laws
I can't believe it's your worst of the year...
-
But he was no Cary Grant - though he tried mightily. Countless actors were influenced by Deniro and Pacino, but they were not them. Willis may have wanted to be a brooding type like Rourke, but he never was. Rourke never had comic ability. Never. So he would not have been cast in Willis roles - prior to Diehard. And I loved moonlighting. And I am 43 years old dude, so yes, I was around in the eighties. Right before I joined the Marines. And Moonlighting was a favorite on the base. TV was different back then, not as much variety, so the comparison to Greys is patently absurd. Moonlighting was a funny, hip, light action adventure show, with an awesome dynamic between a smokin hot Cybill Shepherd and Willis. And yes, you are an idiot. Just about every big name actor turns down roles that they regret, or are considered for roles that they would be terrible for. Redford was considered for Superman. Rourke fucked his career up, but he and Willis were never on the same track. Willis would never have been considered for they type of roles Rourke was or vice versa. At least, not until Willis broke through with Diehard. And if you think Rourke could have pulled that off, you are an even bigger idiot than I think you are. Comic timing. Rourke had none.
-
how it doesnt get in there when Boston Legal does suprises me.
For me the best 5 of 2008 (Calendar year) in TV Drama was :
The Shield - Last few episodes some of the best TV, and had a much better conclusion than the likes of Sopranos, or the Wire. Though Six Feet Under still has the best final episode for me.
Lost -smartest show and most addictive show on network TV, I am in pain waiting for the 5th season to start.
Dexter - Always entertaining and so well put together. Smits added a great dimension this season.
Battle Star Galactica - its sad that critics in general can't see past the Sci-fi and see the brilliant writing, directing and acting.
In Treatment - Started watching this wondering how it could sustain 43 epsiodes of just a couple of people talking. This insight to therapy, with some incredible acting and careful revealling of information made this compelling watching.
Just missing out; The Wire, Generation Kill, and Mad Men
-
see Diner? Did you not see Barfly? The point is, Rourke was set up to be a superstar and he could have achieved it had he not gone mental. He was offered and turned down Axel Foley in Beverly Hills Cop, Elliot Ness in The Untouchables, Charlie Sheen's role in plattoon, Charley Babbit in Rain Man, Johnny Ringo in Tombstone, and Nick Nolte's part in 48 Hours. He was set up to have about 5 or 6 movies before Bruce Willis got Die Hard. And you keep talking about Bruce Willis's comic timing. Which movies are you referring to? Hudson Hawk? Death Becomes Her? The Whole Ten Yards? The point is, they could have had very similar carreers than they have now. In fact, I think Willis has made more bombs than Rourke. But, Willis got his one big series he can keep going back to when he has a carreer lull. Rourke doesn't have that. He could have, though, if he didn't turn down Beverly Hills Cop or 48 Hours. Instead, he thought Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man would be his big franchise. He could be a $20 million a film guy if he played his cards right. As of 1988, if you asked every film critic in films today who would be the bigger star 20 years later, Rourke or Willis (who intentionally "borrowed" many Rourke mannerisms), 99.9% of them would have said Rourke...
-
That Rourke screwed up his career? yeah. Duh. You can not compare the two. Might as well compare Val Kilmer and Tom Cruise. Emilio Estevez and Charlie Sheen. The point is, he did not do the roles he turned down, so no one knows if the movies would have been a bomb or not. BHC without Murphy would not be the same. Just as Raiders with Tom Selleck would not have been the same. Or Casablanca with top choice - Ronald Reagan, would not have been the same. You can not play that game. And yes, I saw Diner, and Barfly, and no Rourke has no comic timing. That does not mean he can not deliver a funny line, he is a damn good actor, I never said he was not. I said he was not a light comedian. Willis was. Moonlighting was a very funny show, that was elevated to greatness by Willis' comic timing. 'Do bears bear, do bees bee?' That is a silly line, but Willis made it work. Rourke would have been too embarrassed to try and pull that off. So, once again, there is no comparison between their careers. Rourke could have had a great career, alongside Willis great career, and they would not have competed for roles. Arnie, Sly and Bruce were the action stars of the eighties and early nineties. Rourke was in line to be the next Deniro or Brando, totally different track. And if you can not see the comic timing in just about every Willis movies, even the ones that bombed, then you are an idiot.
-
The first half was okay but the rest of it was lame. Even my wife, who likes everything, thought it sucked. I am SHOCKED at just how popular it is. It was average at best.
-
they both looked enough alike to be brothers and almost talked in the same voice. Look, you're the one who attacked me. I made an observation and you attacked that observation unprovoked. You started shit with me and I set out to prove my case. Mickey Rourke was a better actor than Bruce Willis in the mid 80's and should have had a better carreer. He's done comedy and Bruce Willis stated in an interview that his style back then was patterned after Mickey Rourke. So, those are all my points. Stop talking shit to me and I won't call you out. You asked me why I said what I said and I'm telling you. Your Kilmer and Cruise comparisons are not the same thing. Those guys are totally different and don't act the same way. As far as you not thinking Rourke had good comic timing in those movies, I'm sure I can link you to dozens of professional movie critics that would disagree with you. It's OK for you to state your opinion but if you are going to say something that you know is contrary to the vast majority of other's opinions, prepare to be called out on it. Mickey Rourke got almost universal acclaim for his performance in Diner. Show any comparable praise for any of Bruce Willis's "comic" roles. He's good at snappy one-liners in Die Hard but other than that, show me a hit comedy that Willis was in where he was pointed out by anybody for his "perfect comic timing". You know you're alone on this one. I hate that you've put me in the position of bashing Bruce Willis cause I really like him, but he's never been a great actor. He can raise his game up to the material or give good performances when paired with other good actor's. But, Rourke was hearalded for being one of the best young actors of the early to mid 80's and was praised for his "comedic" role in Diner, praise that I don't recall Willis ever receiving...
-
...so it was really a bad movie? Seriously? I guess what I'm trying to ask is, "you really think TDK was a shitty movie?" Seriously? You really thought it was bad? Some guy above thought that Batman ('89) and Batman Returns were better? Really? I suppose I'm just not sophisticated enough to know what's good on film anymore and I'll just stick to reading from now on. Really? TDK sucked? Seriously?
-
You stake out a position -that is stupid, and when confronted with the evidence to the contrary, you refuse to accept it. You made the comparison between Willis and Rourke. I pointed out how stupid a comparison that is. So they had a similar look? Big deal. They did not have similar talent! Rourke was by far the better actor. My point, and I will type slowly because you are, after all, an acknowledge idiot, is that Willis was a great light comic. And Rourke was a great brooding talent. Do you see the difference? Even if there is a slight physical resemblance, and I do mean slight, the talent level and the career track were completely different. Could Willis have done 9 1/2 weeks? Could Rourke have done Look who's Talking (and before you slam that, Willis was great in that voice over role). You make nonsensical points. Rourke turned down roles. So what. All actors do. The movies were made and they were great with other actors. Wopuld they have been great with Rourke? No way to ever tell. Willis got rave reviews for Moonlighting, perhaps you forgot it was a number one show. Rave reviews for Diehard, a number one movie. Pulp Fiction (revived his career along with Travolta). I am not slamming Rourke or Willis. Only you, for making a dumb comparison. Like I said, just because Willis wanted to be a brooding actor like Rourke, did not mean he could be that. And history has proven he never could have been. He carved out his own niche. Rourke can deliver a funny line, Rourke could never pull off a sustained comic performance. Get it? Probably not. You are, after all, an idiot.
-
I'm so sick to death of the bullshit surrounding "The Dark Knight Returns." Demanding Oscars Nods for TDK as well as for Heath Ledger's performance is an affront to legitimate movies that deserve OSCARS more than TDK.
I've seen the movie and to be honest, Batman Returns was a whole lot better than TDK. Heath Ledger's performance wasn't that great and definitely sucked when compared to Jack Nicholson's performance of the Joker.
To demand an Oscar nod for him because he died before the movie was finished is a slap in the face to those actors and actresses who deserve it more than Heath Ledger is a disgrace to the whole nomination system.
Heath was a mediocre actor who never seemed to improve his acting. A Knight's Tale was performed better than TDK and if he should get an OSCAR, it shouldn't be for TDK.
It seems that the Academy and OSCAR are shifting towards offering sympathy nominations is a slap in the face to those who really deserve it.
So, FUCK YOU ACADEMY AND OSCAR. YOU'RE A DISGRACE. -
Jan 05, 2009 11:26:07 PM CST
Benjamin Button is a film for people who don't like films.
by kid idioteque
It's so broad and forced, it's like a cinematic vitamin for people who only see 1 or 2 movies a year in theaters. It's not bad, but it's not about anything. The Wrestler is the best film of the year, followed closely by Slumdog Millionaire. Both TDK and Wall-e were good, but wildly overrated. Choke is the single most under-appreciated film of the year, along with In Bruges. That's 2008 in a nutshell.
-
that in their primes looked and talked almost exactly alike. How crazy of me to compare the two. Especially when one of them admitted he tried to emulate the other. Comparing those two is nothing like comparing Kilmer and Cruise and you know it. You're just trying to bait me into an argument to be an asshole. I was on here having movie discussions with other people and you decided to be an asshole and attack me. So, I want you to back up your stupid fucking claim that Rourke had no comic timing and tell the whole world Bruce Willis's role where he had noticably better timing than Rourke in Diner. Why don't you point out to me Bruce's "sustained comic performance" for me. Or were you just being an asshole who wanted to fuck with me again? You couldn't just say, "I don't agree with that". You had to go for, "Coughlins is being an idiot again". Well, I have laid out my case with specific examples. You just state your opinion as fact with nothing to back it up. I think you're wrong and have told you why. You haven't done the same. So, why don't you just go watch your Moonlighting reruns and stop bugging serious movie fans, why don't you...
-
Jan 05, 2009 11:44:44 PM CST
Plus, toadkiller, if you don't think the audience for Moonlighti
by coughlins laws
was 70% female, 30% male, you're the idiot...
-
It was really good actually. Hoffman and Streep brought their A+ games.
-
I've been looking for a good piss ladle. No one around here can fill your shoes. We're gettin' real close the inauguration and I can't wait for you to start paying for my unemployment.
-
And joyless. And too long. And pretentious. And edited weirdly. Nice photography though.
-
This is what TDK should have been called.
-
I'm curious, where are you coming up with your info? When and where did Willis makes these claims you're making? Where did your 70/30 audience split for moonlighting come from? I am curious and would like to see them myself.It's okay if they don't exist, sometimes people remember things that aren't exactly accurate.
-
fuck you, producers guild, wherever you are...
-
Gary Oldman was wasted in both films. Look at what he did in Romeo Is Bleeding...and The Professional...but he has been completely wasted in the Batman films, used to just stand around delivering lines that any two-bit actor in Hollywood could deliver. The same with Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman...and so on. All these great actors have been wasted by Nolan and company. Look at Morgan in Wanted, he was great...and stole the movie, but he has been wasted in Batman Begins and Dark Knight. And Heath Ledger's performance was not great in The Dark Knight, either??? The director, Chris Nolan, did not do his job. Hell, he even wasted Maggie Gyllenhaal...who is a great stand-out in everything??? Look at the film The Secretary...she is great, but Nolan did nothing with her in TDK???No, he does not deserve any props for TDK. It was a pedestrian film that has been overrated because sadly, Heath Ledger, a good man, died.
-
Jan 06, 2009 1:09:20 AM CST
No chance in hell TDK wins the oscar for best pic.
by allpowerfulwizardofoz
Will be Slumdog or Milk.
-
Like most matters of opinion, particularly when expressed on tha intranets, people on both sides of the TDK Oscar aisle are being a little boneheaded. I fall on the side of people who don't hate TDK, but don't think it comes close to "Best Picture". I enjoyed it and think it's a decent film, but I wish the rabid fans would take a step back and recognize the issues that have been brought up about it. Admit that there's a POSSIBILITY that the film is flawed in ways that MILK or Slumdog Millionaire or Frost/Nixon are not. I liked Iron Man an awful lot, but I wouldn't nominate it for Best Picture. Because it really wasn't. My comic fan standing doesn't require that I wholeheartedly and emptyheadedly (I know, that's not really a word) support a film just because it happens to be a well-made adaptation of a comic book.
-
There was absolutely nothing special or extraordinary about The Dark Knight. Christian Bale was dull, the editing was annoying, the production design was so pedestrian, they turned Gotham into just another city. There was no heart, no soul, no imagination, no humour. It was a Michael Mann rip-off. Hellboy II was much better.
-
no coincidence why 8 is code for nazis.
-
Jan 06, 2009 3:34:56 AM CST
There are simpletons still existing in the new millenium
by ceejaynightwing
and they couldn't assess a movie if they studied with the best! Wall-E isn't a slapstick comedy, it isn't a movie about robots running around to make you laugh without dialog! It's a movie with far more important message about our life, where we are heading and the sheer scope of the ecological disaster we have created. It's done with a large faction of visual narrative which is PERFECT, and it utilizes th best virtual camer work and virtual lighting EVER for an animated feature becasue they simply studied the working of real cameras and the methods of award winning camera men enough to develop and compose sequences that are; for those with eye for such things, simply outstanding! The last artificial machine we leave behind to do our dirty work is the one that returns with the message of hope and a far better developed humanity with all the desire, emotion and responsibility that we all need to get ourselves on the right path to becoming humane. It's PIXARS strongest film by a mile, it's most mature effort by a mile and anyone telling you its their weakest is still stuck in Loony-toon mode expecting 90 minutes of slpastick. Assessing a movie isn't about making it into what you want it to be, it's about addressing it for what it is and how well it has achieved its goals on all aspects. Wall-E hits a perfect 10 for all its achievements, the movie is flawless in its craft!
-
Word. 'It's not frequently funny' is the most inane criticism of Wall-E ever made.
-
You know, even though I wasn't a fan of Batman Begins, it actually is a much better film in execution than Dark Knight. Both films are dull, slow, dour...and have no heart or soul whatsoever??? I recall all the spinning camera moves in Dark Knight, and I wondered, "What is the point of this, the film is empty? Why have all these camera moves designed to make the film appear important, and yet, there is nothing to the script, the dialogue, or the acting??? Virtually anybody average actor could have played any of the roles in the movie, as all the actors just stood around looking bored, thanks to the vacuous script and equally vacuous directing work by Nolan.Now, I'll admit that Ledger tried to give a performance, but he wasn't given the kind of direction, dialogue, or plot, that I would say was worthy of him or his attempts. If Ledger hadn't died, I suspect the reviews of The Dark Knight would have largely savaged the movie.
-
It doesn't need the coin. Recession and piracy are hitting the business hard. Cinemas need more butts on seats and people will see TDK's reissue regardless. So yes it will get the nom. As one of the best films of all time (yes, really) there is no way it won't. But the box office will make sure Milk, Frost/Nixon or The Wrestler gets it instead.
-
weak film with too much made up shit in it.
-
They need to call the place New York or Chicago. That name Gotham is wearing on my nerves.
-
Sorry, for me calling 'Gotham' either Chicago or New York is like someone making LOTR and saying it's not the Shire, it's New Zealand.
-
for a film thats a) Hugely popular and b) earns a shit load of cash. At the end of the day, geeks just want to feel special, like they're the only one who knows and loves any particular film. You could say they subsitute films for healthly adult relationships. Just a wild stab in the dark.
-
Feel stupid now?
-
But I think dislike is certainly feasible. Saying TDK is soul-less is ridiculous - clearly the Nolans and everyone else involved put their heart and soul into it.
-
MILK will win... Hollywood loves the story of a homo.
-
Oscar loves gays? Yes, maybe that's why Brokeback Mountain won Score, Screenplay and Director and Jake, Heath and the Movie lost their Oscars - the last one, to, of all nominees... Crash. The only movie about gay people that has won is still "Midnight Cowboy" and the relationship was blurred enough to justify its win. "Kiss of the Spider Woman"? Lost. "The Hours"? Lost. "The Color Purple"? Lost (0 Oscars out of 11 noms, Spielberg snubbed!). Recheck your data... they can award gay crew members, but how many openly gay or lesbian actors and actresses have won? I'm still trying to remember one - deal with it, Ian McKellen is gay and lost. Even the supposedly closeted one have trouble with this (Cruise, Travolta, etc).
-
Here's a little task, do a check on every BEST PICTURE winner and you'll discover that DARK KNIGHT WILL NOT win. It'll go to either frost/Nixon or milk. An impoverished indian girl will NOT win over american cultural icons. To a lesser degree, Benjamin buttom MAY be a good bet due to it's use of historical settings - just like titanic or forest gump. But don't expect for one second that DARK KNIGHT will EVER win an academy award for best picture.
-
...The citizen ferry had blown the prison ferry sky high.
This would be keeping with the lessons of the Stanford Prison Experiment and Abu Ghraib...in a crisis, a mob would side with the businessman who seized the detonator and egg him on. Ugly but true: it's how witch hunts, Nazi Germany and lynchings came to pass...mob mentality is a killer.
Nolan went with a cornball resolution, and thus robbed the movie of brutal but crucial impact that would have made Dent's conversion truly tragic, Batman's exile more poignant and The Joker's madness more wickedly prophetic. -
It's a fucking disgrace that The Wire hasn't been nominated AGAIN. That said, I love me some Entourage so hope the fucker wins. Button for Movie of the Year.
-
Therein lies the problem. A blockbuster like TDK must, ultimately, reassure. If it were an Independant film it could blow up a ferry... but wouldn't have the effects to pull it off.
-
Moonlighting but are you really gonna make the case it was a show geared towards women? I'm sure some men watch Grey's Anatomy, too. As far as what Willis said about Rourke, it's easy to find the quote on the internet if you look for it. I really like Bruce Willis but he was just being an asshole so I had to put him in his place.
-
Jan 06, 2009 7:23:26 AM CST
Media Messiah, did you really want Gary Oldman's character
by coughlins laws
to outshine Batman and the Joker? Did you really want the butler to outshine Batman, the Joker, and Harvey Dent? I don't understand the point of your post. How were they "wasted"? What should have been done differently with them in your eyes? They brought a certain "gravitas" to the movie, each in their own ways. Most people have praised Caine's and Oldman's performances. Did you want them more "over the top"? What did you expect them to do? Should Freeman been more lively? Should he have acted like "Crazy" Joe Clark? What did you want from them?
-
Jan 06, 2009 7:28:49 AM CST
Hey, dannyboy, sure am glad you've matured a little...
by coughlins laws
At least you're not threatening my life anymore. Now you just want to pee on me. I'm glad you've grown up. I'd tell you to have fun with my money, but Obama is already breaking that promise and has talked about not raising taxes. I feel for you, though. You must feel stupid believing anything Obama said when he's already backed off on taxes and plans to continue Bush foreign policy...
-
It's not ' Honorable Mention ' material, either. ' Incredible Hulk ' was the better Marvel flick, even though it pussied out on the ending a bit ( Hulk DOESN'T kill the Abomination that almost all forms of human weaponry couldn't incapacitate, yet finds military choppers lots more expedient. Not that there is anything wrong with the sequence. ). It is even the more significant contribution to superhero film genra; legitimately accomodated a crossover with another property, and more clearly established a ' shared superhero movie universe ' - perhaps, the first in U.S. film history. The only thing Iron Man’s got compared to that is learning to speak his name.
And ' John Rambo ' was far, far more rewarding - and FUNNIER than this outright mendicancy could ever fucking hope to be. I am feeling right now that history wouldn't be so kind with this flick. Moreso, it succeeds much better in being is the Republican, manly, '80s era throwback action flick ' Iron Man ' thought it was - albeit one that doesn't feel the need to pander and kiss the ass of neocon foreign policy to do so !
Which leads me to a point I wanna bring to light. I don't get these spate wimpy ' chickenhalk ' action stuff with ' Shoot 'Em Up ' and ' 300 ', and this movie. You don't need to be a Bushie, scoff at your own liberalism, or espouse violence and chicks like some eager newbie to be a macho bad-ass. No need for any of your rationalizing, or overthinking, or Freudian bullshit, of silly little quips. It’s fucking simple: you just have to go out there and tear those motherfucking bastards apart ! Torturing and impaling ( at least in spirit ) more Arabs and minorities than everyone else does NOT a real man make. Much less from the inside a pansy dork robo-suit !
I mean, the film brushing that female reporter off as ' bitchy liberal trash '. What's the fucking deal with THAT ? Yeah, okay sure,fine. ' Clever ', I suppose. But you KNOW those filmmakers are onto her views, too all the same ( the apparent ' wimpiness ' of which reflects more their ' we're not worthy ' self-perception ). .So they’re reduced to keeping their real sympathies in their chest, and be bitches to their posturing ' coz they don't wanna be found out as ' uncool ' ? I don't need to see any of THAT in my action flick.
Most of these guys seem like these geeks so damn eager to please; prancing about in football jersey wear, slapping girlie buttocks around so they could be ' one of the jocks '. And everytime, it's not gonna look quite right. It just looks AKWARD. It plain looks UNINSPIRED. Glad people like Stallone and Eastwood are still on the game, showing all these little twits how the shit ought to be done. Perhaps they should take notes - if only so they won't get the living snot beaten out of them. I'm going to restate what I've always thought this film always was since it came out : a well-made, expertly acted, solidly directed, AVERAGE action movie, with chauvinist pretentions. Or an expensive, big budgeted sitcom of ' Batman Begins ' LITE. So, whatever.
-
' Iron Man ' DIDN'T even have the balls to call out ‘ Islamofascism’ either; much less make their bad guys of that stripe ( they certainly weren't specifically ' Muslim militants ', perse ). One which I see no problem doing in fiction, anyways. Even though I strongly oppose the current genocide of Gazans by Israelis, I don't think these Al-Quaeda fucks are helping in the situation, either. So, fire away.
The main problem I see with liberal Hollywood and these filmmakers in general is not that they are as hesitant to confront or deal with the issue of Islamic terror; they’re pretty much made up their mind that THEY are the main wrong thing in this planet. Much as they prance around like the Democrats, especially the Clintonian side - focused a lot more on protecting their ideological side of the aisle, than doing what is essentially moral, or failing that, pander to the ruling neo-con turds as far as they can to ensure their party's survival.
( And Al-Quaeda should finally be distinguished from Hamas in public discussion right now, in implication or otherwise. While they admittedly do have their own issues ( furthering, what is, and could only lead to humanitarian disaster ( why did you suppose these Jews were forced to etching a country out of another one ), they are mainly out for land denied from a people, which is miles apart from a bunch of jerks pushing for a global caliphate.
Fitting though, as how much this whole current Islamist upheaval stemmed from the U.S. setting up shop in the Arab holy land; not this hyped up‘ Clash of Civilizations’ )
See, these fellas don’t paint Islamofascism as ' enemy ' all too often ain't really ' coz they believe it less of a threat than the ' oh-so-noble ' right. Much as ' coz they're more focused on protecting their overall mileage, and self-aggrandizing with their lucrative ' pet issues '. That’s just what takes up most of their time. Else, people like Michael Moore wouldn't look so much of an outcast around them in comparison.
( Ever seen ' Syriana ' ? I’ve never seen a group of so-called ' Leftists ' stick their heads up Milton Friedmann's ass to further their ' alternative energy ' pablum than in there . Not that alternative energy IS pablum. That’s almost the same headspace ‘ Iron Man’ was coming from. Almost. )
What the makers of this film did was muddle the reality of their ' villians ' so they wouldn't sting so much, marketing and PR wise. Instead, they make them LOOK like the Islamofascists, SOUND like the Islamofascits, and ACT like Islamofascists, ARE Islamofascists. No, they are your tried and true, stereotypical, yet easily recognizable Arab thug types, Orientalist fiends bent on destroying and seizing power in the West as the ‘ Ten Rings’; the easy agenda and drive of which are perhaps the sickness, underlying evil in it all. . Which is several times more dismissive and ethnocentric !
-
"It drives me nuts that Christian Bale's excessively gruff "Batman voice" should be the target of so much snark when the performance perfectly distils the film's central idea: that the overstated attempt to become an indefatigable icon in the name of justice is doomed to fail"
-
That's very interesting...and in the world that we live, that sounds more likely than not. And how interesting it would have been, bouncing between the two boats, if the convicts remained silent while the "good people of Gotham" formed a mob mentality, as you mentioned. Despite such depths of darkness that THE DARK KNIGHT would have gone, your suggestion rings true. And I wonder if even Nolan could have gotten THAT by the studio. It sounds to me as though it would have heightened the tension and excitement. And I think the ultimate compromise would be for the "mob" to begin fighting for the switch, which would somehow brake in the panic. Or someone pulls the wires. Something, to that effect.
-
I totally and completely agree with your "ferry" argument. That was one of the (very few) things that ruined a bit the overall brilliance of TDK for me.
-
Do you people have something against fun and happiness and song?
-
Hamas mia, here we go again
Zionists, how can we resist you?
Hamas mia, go to war again
Zionists, just how much we've missed you
-
I don't get it either.. but I don't believe it will win.. Hollywood isn't prepared to reward a movie like that. Hollywood has made an elitist club out of the Best Picture Category, and they don't want to allow any mainstream movie in to win. It really feels like if there is no controversial topic, history lesson or some other avant garde aspect to the story, they wont' go there. Seems like these other movies aren't anything groundbreaking or earth shattering. I don't really care, given what we know about the academy.. but for once it would be nice to see them reward a film for pushing the limits of its genre like TDK did.. for transcending the action / superhero movie thats become so typical. I'd settle for something like Best Original Screenplay or similar, but that is only one aspect of what makes that movie so groundbreaking. It won't happen, but we can dream.
-
Absolutely not. TDK's script is its biggest flaw. Any genuine aggravation or "hate" I have toward the movie has to do with script issues. Plot holes, weak or underdeveloped subplots, questionable character motivations, questionable story logic... it's all script based criticism. To be hyperbolic, that screenplay would barely qualify for Best Original Birdcage Bottom.
-
Mainstream films are usually the only ones that win Best picture.
-
Best Picture,Director,Supporting Actor (Ledger),Original Screenplay and Music (Score.
-
Jan 06, 2009 12:55:45 PM CST
Ironman was a fun Movie, TDK: great, but not best of the year.
by stalkeye
Not for nuttin' I couldn't decide which film should be considered best of the year as many were very good.I didn't expect to like Slumdog going in, but it's worthy of an Oscar nod unlike forrest gum...er i meant Benjamin Buttons.As for the guy that said Incredible Hulk was better than Ironman, I know to each his own..but dammmnnnn you're taking this too far.Oh and the Wrestler was another surprise but not worthy of a prestigous award.It's like watching Micky Rouke starring as Micky Rouke.Defiance was good but it's easily gonna be overlooked for any nomination.
-
Couldn't disagree more. No one has developed a big budget film with this much complexity. If you're saying it needs to be perfectly realistic and make absolute sense in the world we live in, then why make movies? Otherwise, I don't see the problems you're referring to.
-
What exactly is it that you and others find so complex and deep about TDK?
-
What kind of joke is this ? Batman Begins pisses all over it. Dark Knight was a major movie failure, even if box office was great. IT SUCKED. time to tell it like it. IT'S CRAP.
-
...you FAIL.
-
Batman and Robin was a piece of shit. Calling TDK shit, regardless of your own personal taste, makes you look like a Class A fucktard.
-
The thing is, it doesn't feel like a Batman movie, now that's not down to the opinion (as I’ve read here and there) that Batman isn't in it enough. But rather because it doesn't behave like any superhero film I've ever seen. Nolan has really pulled away everything that's been standard to these kinds of films and got to the fundamentals. What makes criminals and vigilantes tick, what makes them afraid? What price is justice worth and who can deliver it? It's one of the important points of the film that no matter the facts of Dent's case against the mob, if people know he became a killer the case falls apart. Everything is built on a cult of personality nowadays. The Joker is a cult, the young thugs and the mentally ill being "the minds that the Joker attracts". Batman is a cult - with his hapless copycats inspired by his actions. Symbols lack nuance and as such they are corruptible. It sounds like the opposite of Begins message but it's just the logical conclusion.
I think the key line in the film is The Joker's "I'm not a monster I'm just a head of the curve" In my opinion not only is it the one truthful thing he says in the film it's the essence of the last scene in Begins. In that film Batman was the man ahead of the curve, the criminals knew nothing like him. But now it's Batman dealing with something he doesn't grasp. For all his noble intentions and violent righteousness he isn't smart enough to see that unless you have a scorched earth policy the opposition will evolve, even though he's one of the key points of the graph charting the escalation of the dark side. It’s the enantiodromia of the coming Dark Age.
Dent, well the man is a dick from the get go, right? Tell me no-one was actually rooting for him, please? A square jawed politician with a martyrdom complex is not going to save anyone. In trying to triangulate where Batman, The Joker and Two Face would stand in relation to each other what I got was the idea that Two Face is the child of Batman and The Joker. In the sense that he is partly an agent of chaos but also a believer in some sort of justice and retribution for the person he lost.
Heath Ledger's The Joker might be read as Al Qaeda etc but he can be read as The US too. If Batman was the mob's 9/11 then The Joker is surely the law breaking nihilistic scum in the White House destroying any idea of real justice. The fact that the Joker attracts troubled young men is a fairly obvious allegory for the thousands of people who joined the military after 9/11. (If at this point you think I'm attacking the military across the board kindly grow a brain, thank you.) But then there’s the second most important line in the film, when Bruce asks Alfred how they found the outlaw in Burma and he says they burnt the jungle down, well he could could easily have said “We had to destroy the village in order to save it”
When I said it was the finest fictional film about The War on Terror yet made, this is what I meant. Nolan covers the feelings and processes of what happens when reality shifts to incorporate heretofore unimagined horrors and how some can make hay while it happens.
The Hong Kong bit was important in terms of A) proving The Joker right B)proving Bruce's handling of Wayne Enterprises had a purpose and showing that Batman isn't defeated by physical obstacle. But I actually don't think that part needs any defending because the film didn't feel bloated at all. 2hrs35mins flew by, I find some films hard going when they only last 90 minutes but this was so well structured and plotted it needed every single second it had to tell the story properly.
The film is just full of these thematic elements I'm going to have to watch it again to remember it all.
I loved the way Batman isn't made to look cool all the time, he looks kinda goofy sometimes because someone dressing up like that in reality would look goofy. Nolan wasn't interested in appeasing 14 yr old boys here, not at all in fact. I'm just waiting to read someone moaning it was an anti climax because the boats didn't blow up or there wasn't a prolonged fight with a recently disfigured mentally ill man at the end. Maggie Gyllenhaal was great too, although Rachel was underwritten she still gave the film its most heart wrenching moment and that blast of air across her face just before the flames was poetry.
I can't fully embrace the film though. Though the boat scenes were thematically essential I couldn't suspend disbelief enough to buy the prisoner's actions. It seemed ridiculous to me that someone that was respected (feared) enough by his fellow cons to speak for them was also selfless enough to sacrifice himself for people he didn't give a fuck about. The reaction on the other ferry was more believable. When the man who thought he could be a badass for “the greater good” had an attack of empathy I let out a little cheer. Batman finally getting the best of The Joker thanks to Lucius Fox flying batarangs things was a really poor way for him to get the upper hand. It should be Batman’s mind and dedication that allow him to “win” eventually. Although I guess the idea that even he needs to rely on others is fitting.
It’s superbly edited, the fight scenes are still chaotic but you can tell who’s who a lot easier, the practical effects are amazing, the best I’ve seen in the last 15 years. The score just sorta washed over me though, I couldn’t hum a single bar and I didn’t even notice The Joker’s theme which I read was very well done. Maybe the cinema I watched it in didn’t have the sound level right.
Overall though this is a stunning achievement and one I know I’ll be able to re-watch over and over again and glean more from it. As a film that marks where we are now and where we might be going it’s as prescient as Fight Club and I don’t think I can praise it anymore than that. -
I'm just glad comics are being recognized as true art, though I wonder if it would've made it to the Oscars with 'Batman' in the title. I think The Dark Knight sounds more classic. Now we need 10 more DC movies on par with this one.
-
It's all the Marvel Zombies that are still stunned over TDK's success. Who else would honestly believe Iron Man was a better film. Add in all the homo-phobes that hate Heath "Brokeback Mountain" Ledger. Then, you add all the "film purists" that hate any blockbuster film that lures audiences away from whatever POS indie flick they're trying to hype, and finally, you take into account all the idiot foreigners that are pissed because Mama Mia didn't do that well in the U.S., and that about sums it up.
Fuck all of you. TDK rules, bitches!
Oh yeah, FUCK RDJ AND FUCK MARVEL COMICS! -
Thanks for your very detailed assessment of TDK. You've managed to defend the film without resorting to the usual cries of "If you don't love The Dark Knight then you're a hater and know nothing about cinema." Do I agree with you? Some, not much but I respect what you said and how you said it. We need more posts like your around here.
-
I thought I was watching Michael Moore's Batman. Plus I thought this was the movie that was going to redeem Two Face from the crap treatment he was given in Batman Forever. Instead we got a rush job ending that totally wasted his character.
-
Excellent points! Well done. The only thing I might disagree with you on is the prisoner's actions on the ferry boat. Since we have no idea who that guy is/was and we have no idea what he was incarcerated for, we can't judge his character or predict his actions/moral values. It's a miscalculation on the part of the Joker and in the end, it bit him in the ass.For future reference, when making long posts, you may wish to use for your paragraph breaks. (Just remove the spaces inbetween.)
-
is a perfect example of what I was just saying to Cameron.
-
It's aiite. Courtoom adjourned!
-
I'm the Batman yo.
-
The ferries each had their OWN detonators. Would the Joker do it any other way?
-
TheY were really attuned to their own ferries. You try to blow up the other boat, you end up offing yourself. Clever!
-
thanks for your replies and the paragraph tip. I got no issue with someone who doesn't like it and it's gigantic success and praise does make it overrated but I'm fairly confident it'll be considered somewhat of a modern classic in 5-10 years from now when all the hyperbole has died now.
-
One thing is for sure, the interrogtion scene in Dark Knight was flawless.
-
It will really be interesting to see how it holds up. I seem to remember everyone going gaga over Burton's Batman when it came out and now it's treated like a red-headed step child. Count me as one of those people who likes TDK a lot, saw it twice in the theatre and own the DVD but thinks that it's definitely overrated. My personal feeling is that when the smoke finally clears a few years from now it will be looked at as a very good movie with one really great performance and some major flaws. Good point on Tiny Lister's character. The audience (me included) took one look at this big, scary motherfukcer and assumed that he had to be a hard case. Hell he could have been a deadbeat dad or bookie for all we know. I do think however that some con would certainly pressed the plunger. The whole feelgoodness about the outcome felt contrived and trite and this is coming form a Capra-corn lover.
-
...it dries up so fast its fucking ridiculous. Might as well jerk off with shampoo.
-
Agreed.
-
Disagree all you want. Plenty of others have. And frankly I'm tired of going through the argument time after time after time. Most likely you don't see the problems because you don't WANT to see the problems. Your statement about no other blockbuster with that much complexity is laughable. T2 had as much complexity. Alien. Aliens. Silence of the Lambs. The list could go on and on, but it doesn't have to. Your reaction is pure hyperbole, which unfortunately more often than not is what I find from the TDK crowd. Guys like Cameron can at least frame the argument in terms that don't blow it out of all proportion. The fact that you use the "it doesn't have to be perfectly realistic" argument when Nolan's own artistic endeavor was to CREATE a "realistic" Batman just goes to show how little actual thought you've put into it. I liked the movie enough to PUT thought into it, and I've come to the conclusion that for all of its merits, there are significant flaws. Most of which involve the script. So when you talked about "Best Original Screenplay" (and for the record, it would more likely be nominated for Best Adapted since it's... an adaptation of a comic book), I needed to speak up.
-
sorry
-
I like TDK, but I fucking hated Begins. Burton's Batman will always have a favorable spot in film history.
-
T2 and Aliens had as much complexity as The Dark Knight? What the fuck are you on man? Hate on TDK all you want, but even if you thought the script was utter shit-- that doesn't make it any less complex. Aliens had complexity? Fuck off with that laughably ignorant comment. Maybe it was complex for Sarah Palin's retarded infant-- but it wasn't complex for a person over the age of 5 with moderate intelligence.
-
Scary. We agree on something.
-
Burton's Batman that is.
-
See, I read all that and I have to wonder how much of that is actually evident in the film and how much of that is you transferring your own thought process and/or philosophy onto the film? Part of what I find troublesome about TDK is that it feels to me like there's a lot of philosophical posturing. It's like the old SNL sketch where Jimmy Smits takes someone's statement, reverses it, and makes it into a question. "We solved the case!" "Did we, or did the case... solve us?" It SOUNDS meaningful, but if you actually pay attention, it doesn't mean anything. I dunno, that's my opinion. How do you feel about it? Am I totally off base there?
-
That those of us who love Batman and Batman movies, especially Batman Begins, TDK, etc, but disagree that TDK Is The Greatest Superhero Movie Ever Made is labeled a TDK Hater. I think those who use the word 'hater' probably have no problems using the word 'player', but of course probably spell it 'playa.' They gripe that those who dislike TDK are just trying to be different, to be trendy, etc. Yet how many teens and 20 somethings try to do just that every fucking second of their lives...the latest iPod, iPhone, wasting away hours trying to be fake Rock Stars instead of going to school so they can someday cure cancer or something. Movies, TV shows, books, whatever. Same process: Watch, read, listen, and quickly jump on some forum in order to throw their fucking two cents in about either how something was The Best Ever or it Sucked The Worst. No gray areas. I liked TDK a lot. But like many of us on here, there were things I didn't think worked or things that were tedious or belaboured certain points. I think it should've just been all Joker or all Dent/Two-Face. Whether it's Nolan or Schumacher, don't they ever learn? More than one villain is just a bad idea. At least the (oops, I mean, 'da) haters can seem to back up their arguments logically, for the most part. (Except a gift from God named Illuminate). All you get from the TDK Fanatics is "This movie is AWESOME and if you haters can't see it, then you SUCK(or are gay, or suck gayly or something clever). One mentioned TDK Haters as being homo-phobes who hate Heath Ledger. I thought he was amazing in Brokeback Mountain. Another thought the hummingbird in Ben Button is too schmalzy... how about two ferries, one full of "good" people and one full of "bad" people. Both have the ability to blow the other up, but in the end, neither one can...I think I even saw Michael Clarke Duncan saying, "Gimme the detonator, boss..." (Sorry, Zeus).
Ok. Venting over yet again. Blindambition is right, when all is said and done, we had some damn cool superhero movies to enjoy this past summer.
And say what you will about 89 Batman, at least it stayed true to the comic with the Joker's dip in the vat of chemicals... he wasn't just an anarchist with "warpaint". -
Absolutely! I half expected The Sphinx from The Mystery Men to show up and add his two cents worth.
-
"Would the Joker do it any other way?" --Makes you wonder how THE DARK KNIGHT would have performed at the box office, had the Joker proven his point. (Imagine the civilians blowing themselves up.)
-
First of all, I don't "hate on" TDK. I don't think the script is "utter shit". I think it's okay. Not at all Oscar worthy. Enjoyable. But flawed. That's what I said. If you want to interpret my room-temperature feelings about the film as "hate", then I guess I hate an awful LOT of things. Second, I think it's important that we figure out exactly what we mean by "complexity". I mean that TDK doesn't have a leg up on T2 or Aliens when it comes to forwarding a POV. T2 deals with fate and fatalism, the morality of one vs many (should Sarah kill the man responsible for the development of Cyberdine to save the future?), the dangers of technological advancement, the old Philip K thought of "can a machine have a soul?", ideas of child development, the notion of insanity, etc. Does it deal with all of them in depth? Not necessarily. Does TDK? Hrm, not really. Do you see my point? In Aliens we see themes of corporate control and manipulation, we get a great deal of thought about maternal instinct, there's some female empowerment stuff going on, etc. My point here, Danny, is that if you go looking for meaning in a film, you'll often find it. Personally, the fact that TDK so blatantly wears that "look at me, I have meaning!" on its sleeve is mildly aggravating.
-
Thank you for putting into words exactly what I've been feeling about movie/comic book geekdom in general and Dark Knight lovers in particular. And what is up with Rock Band anyway? I remember when teenagers actually learned to play an instrument if they wanted to get laid.
-
...needs more Dexter Morgans!
-
you feel the film doesn't at least address. Sure I'm giving the film a political reading but I don't see anything in the film that would forbid that reading. I gave a few line examples and tied it into an argument for how I viewed the film. I don't know of another way to discuss movie and I certainly don't think a film like TDK has only one possible reading. Having said that, TDK is obviously about unintended consequences and terror and justice otherwise we wouldn't have The Joker as terrorist, Dent as "The White Knight" and Batman's terrorising of the mob coming back to bite him on the ass.
-
I hear you about the water-based lubricants. What do you recommend?
-
I'd go with TDK. What other movie have you seen this year, which every critic agrees is the best picture of the year? Read the reviews, people, and don't say its hyperbole, that's just an excuse. Remember last year, how everyone knew it was between NO COUNTRY and BLOOD? This year, all the four star reviews are stcked in TDK's favor. You can't find a review that disses TDK. I stand by my earlier assessment that the nay-sayers are full of bias. TDK deserves to win Best Picture as much as Titanic, Gladiator, and Shakespeare in Love did.
-
http://tinyurl.com/55h869.
Now that, to me is an incredibly wrongheaded review, but 1) Keith Uhrich can motherfucking write and 2) he give plenty of evidence and explanation to go with his statements. -
I stand corrected. I just read the first review that disses TDK. However, its obvious that Mr. Uhrich has a gripe against Christopher Nolan. I still feel that there have been past winners that have been less deserving.
-
"it's obvious that Mr. Urich has a gripe against Christopher Nolan." Jesus Christ, let it go already. His opinion differs from yours. That's life. Ulrich writes so well that I enjoy his reviews even when he lambasts something that I loved.
-
When a movie that they worship happens to be the beneficiary of good reviews, nominations and rewards they don't hesitate to whip that info out like a sword but if that positve consideration is not given to their movie or worse yet to a movie that they don't like then it's "Fuck reviews and awards shows! What do they elite film snob those faggots anyway?" And speaking of games and blind loyalty, why is when you talk to any American after their football teams wins a game they say "WE won." but if their team loses, they will ALWAYS say "THEY lost?"
-
I didn't say the film forbade your reading. What I asked was do you think the film ITSELF forwarded your theory or is that more YOU reading into it? And I understand that films often leave themselves open to interpretation. I'm fine with that. But does the film offer sufficient evidence of forwarding your theory, OR (and this is obviously what I personally feel, sorry) have you chosen to take more meaning out of the film than it offered? Have you absorbed the information given to you and created an experience of the film that does not, in fact, exist? I doubt you will say, "Yes, necgray, I completely fooled myself!" That would be unprecedented in the history of talkbacks. I just would like you to consider the possibility that you're reading more into the movie than actually exists. Which is not without value. That doesn't make the movie bad. It just makes it, in my POV, not the Best Picture of 2008.
-
Its been entertaining reading all the TDK hate.
If the mainstream read this site, they certainly would be asking "when are the geeks ever going to be happy".
-
I didn't say you ever said the film forbade me from reading into it what I read into it. I said TDK probably has multiple readings. And that mine was a political reading. I asked you what in my review you felt wasn't addressed or implied or there to be found within in the film.
-
Is better than a good day doing work I'm actually supposed to be doing, I guess. Just some good intelligent discussion! I read that book of Cameron up there but he had a lot of valid or at least well thought out points.
Aside from villain ideas, what kinda themes do you think a third possible Nolan Batman might throw out there? The Dark Knight Redeemed? As we last saw, he was on the run and hunted because that's what Gotham needs him to be...
-
The Scout Master. "Get him boythz!"
-
And with that, I'm out for the night.
-
The minute you use the word "obviously" when interpreting a film's meaning, you counter your own later statement that the film can be viewed many ways. If it's obvious, how can it be left to interpretation? "The fact that the Joker attracts troubled young men is a fairly obvious allegory for the thousands of people who joined the military after 9/11." I'd say that's reaching. "Finest fictional film on the War on Terror". Again, reaching. Certainly it makes some effort to bring up the subject of terror as a weapon, but your politicizing is strictly that: YOUR politicizing. You make a good case for the movie actually striving for depth, but like I said to Dannyglover, you can find depth in many other blockbuster genre films, most of which were never nominated for an Oscar. Which is what my argument has boiled down to about the film in recent weeks/months. I actually am sick of talking about the goddam thing and don't think it's WORTH all the time I've spent typing about it, but I'll be damned if the fanboy masses will drool all over TDK's dick without me at least saying, "Hey, you know that dick's got a history of herpes, right?". Okay, weird metaphor, but you get my point...
-
20 years from now i guarantee you Nolans movies will reside into the heap of mediocrity. no one gives a fuck about heath dedger's crackhead joker either. Meanwhile Burton's movies will still seem like the real icons, just like Reeve still remains the iconic Superman.
-
Jan 07, 2009 6:42:10 AM CST
Necgray you are being equally subjective, and it's all good.
by cameron1
I made one unqualified statement about one aspect of the film there. And I haven't seen you or anybody else disprove it to be honest. You can say there's no real depth or subtext to the film as much as you want but you need to give evidence as to why that's the case. You can rubbish the film as much as you like but unless you can really explain why it's not "the finest fictional film about the war on terror yet made" or why there isn't a allegory for the armed forces in the film your being just as subjective as I am. I'm really not interested about it's oscar chances as the awards are meaningless so if you want to frame your arguments around that it's rather pointless directing those arguments at me.
-
if TDK isn't the finest fictional film about The War On Terror (as in the post 9/11 War) and like to know what you think is. I just hope it's not Stop Loss or Lions For Lambs which are far shallower to me than TDK.
-
not the Dark Knight (which is kind of the facist intelligence gathering is always the right thing to do view), but Burn After Reading which deep down is about how blunders like the pre-Iraq WMD intelligence get taken for fact, when they are fiction. But yeah, both films are better than any of the crap that's come out that directly takes on the current political situations. Stop Loss was a joke, and gets my vote for worst film of 2008. I swear it was like a poorly directed Lifetime movie, which is sad because Kimberly Pierce hasn't made a film since Boys Don't Cry which was brilliant.
-
But Burn After Reading is very good pick Samuel Fulmer. Ok, in TDK Batman has the cellphone sonar thing but it's important to note that Batman uses it against something he is responsible for creating (The Joker) and he destroys it as soon as that one thing is done. Also, the film doesn't actually condone what Batman does with the sonar.
-
So that would be condoning it. If it didn't work, than that would not be condoning his methods. Not saying that the film makers were wrong in their choice, but I am saying that by doing that, they are condoning invasion of privacy if it catches a bad guy. And at the end of the day that's not unique to Nolan's Batman, because that's how Batman and most traditional crime fighting superheros operate. There is usually a not so subtle fasict bent in the materials.
-
to my mind the fact that Batman has to adhere to that "fascist" (i'd probably choose authoritarian rather than fascist because Batman is concerned with protecting the weak, not that might equals right) way of thinking in order to defeat his own creation (who is only there because of Bat's own methods in Begins) feels like more of an indictment of those methods than condoning them. Sure on a very very basic level you can say "Well he beat the Joker so the sonar was a good thing" but it disregards all of Batman's previous actions that created the threat that caused him to act in such an aggressively authoritarian way. I'd say the film ends up being incredibly critical of Batman's ideology. My first post on this TB was trying to say as much.
-
Authoritarian is more appropriate than fascist. I know we disagree, but I still feel that if the film was really being critical of Batman's methods, The Joker would've gotten away (even though I guess in the comics he's never truly in jail or Arkham for very long). My feeling is by having him catch the Joker with these methods, it's condoning what he did, whether or not this pisses Morgan Freeman off or leads to his being on the run from the police. It's like the Dirty Harry thing where Harry breaks the law, but we as the audience don't mind because he's doing it to catch others who are breaking the law.
-
Dirty Harry is a good example, though in that I'm sure the film makers want the audience to be on his side, with TDK I think Nolan (or both Nolans) wanted to see how far that support for vigilantism could be pushed and how it distorts notions of justice.
-
The burden of proof doesn't lie with me, it lies with you. That's the difference between making a statement (which is what you did) and being skeptical of the statement (which is what I did). To make matters worse, you're asking me to disprove a statement you made which you haven't really supported. Again, the burden of proof is yours. I can't argue your logic if I don't see it. I would say War, Inc is a better film about the "War on Terror", but then I have a particular opinion about the "war" and that film serves my opinion AND my way of thinking (satirical and/or sarcastic) more than TDK. And yeah, that's subjective. But I would say that there's WAY more proof of War, Inc being a movie about the "War on Terror" than TDK. I would again say that TDK addresses themes of terror, but it's not ABOUT any particular example. If you want to talk about the whole "Joker recruits young, impressionable thugs" thing as a metaphor, it would seem to me that that's far more indicative, metaphorically, of the tactics taken by terrorists the world over, not the U.S. military recruitment process. That's where I say you're stretching. And since that's one of the few actual examples you give me, that's where I'll make my argument. You seem like a reasonable dude, so I don't want to get pissy, but if you're not framing your argument in terms of awards, or at least taking them into consideration, why are you replying to a news item that is specifically about an award? Further, since you're posting an opinion in a talkback for a news item about an award, I reasonably deduce that you are offering your statement as proof that the film does, in fact, merit the consideration of an award. Is that not true? If not, then yeah, it IS pointless talking to you. But then, it's increasingly obvious that this is the case anyway since you've fallen back on the tried and true tactic of "it's all subjective". Well hooray for that. I guess I can now say that Jerry Lewis would make an AWESOME Batman because, hey, it's all subjective.
-
Did we watch different movies? By the end of the film Jim Gordon is all but sainting Batman under the swell of an heroic orchestral piece. It's the end image, the thought that the filmmaker left last as you exit the theater. Even IF the Nolans intend for you to doubt Batman's methods during the course of the film, by the end they are firmly on his side.
-
like I say I laid out my ideas and a few examples in my long post. What I'm trying to say is just because you don't see the points that I have seen in the film doesn't mean they don't exist or that the film can't be read in that way. I'm not falling back on the "it's all subjective" argument because films ARE subjective experiences for everyone. I take that for granted whenever I talk about a film or read a review. I replied on this talkback because Paul Bucarelli asked why people really liked the film. I agree that we are on Batman's side at the end of the film (I was on his side all the way through in fact) but I still feel the film is very critical of what Wayne was trying to do and that his methods were always bound to lead to someone like The Joker being created.
I'd still like to hear why you don't think any of my theories are valid though because so far you've just said that you don't agree with them not why you Don't agree with them. -
I look forward to seeing what it's like.
-
that I could be stretching the point with The Joker/military recruitment angle but I've seen military recruiting officers go after troubled, vulnerable (often underclass) young guys with gusto filling their heads with ideas of both glory and violence so personally I don't feel it's that much of a stretch. However I also think it holds true for terrorist organisation recruitment tactics too,not that I've ever witnessed them.
-
But I HAVE said why I don't agree with your points, at least those involving the military metaphor. I think you're drawing meaning from the film that doesn't actually exist. I believe I said that directly. How else do you propose I answer to your "why"? It's generally my issue with the TDK "depth/complexity" proponents. How much of what they say is proposed by the film actually is supported by the film itself, and how much is them transferring meaning onto it?
-
I have just said the military recruitment angle could be a stretch and that it could well be a terrorist tactic too. You even agreed it was likely to be a terrorist tactic. So now you are agreeing there's a certain level of subtext to the film. But that's not really tackling the substative issues of my post, namely that the film is a reflection of our post 9/11 world and some of the large forces and beliefs within in. ou still haven't said why the film isn't deep or complex, which was again not my argument anyway, I think it's deep and complex FOR a Superhero blockbuster.
-
Jesus H Jumped Up Christ, dude. I have said several times why I think the film isn't deep or complex. It doesn't support the vast majority of statements made about it. A "certain level of subtext" doesn't equal depth. If I have a house with a crawlspace under it, I can't list my house as having a basement. It's the same thing as this film. It has a crawlspace and people are claiming that's a basement. It's got as much depth as any other decent summer blockbuster. It's enough to elevate the movie beyond popcorn flick, but it's not enough to make it Best Picture. Which is, again, the crux of the discussion in this talkback. You want to say it's a fine piece of superhero film, I'll agree with you. But I don't think it's any better than Iron Man, which I'll admit doesn't attempt to evoke as much moral philosophizing, but since TDK half-asses the moral philosophizing anyway, I'd rather watch Iron Man. Because at least Iron Man lacks any and all PRETENSION. TDK is so desperate to be taken seriously it loses some of the appeal of a superhero movie. And it's why I'd rather watch Batman Begins. At least BB wasn't up its own ass.
-
haven't provided a solid argument as to why you don't think there's any depth to it. You've just started "it's not deep". Which is perfectly valid reaction to have. It's just as subjective a reaction as anybody else's though.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 171 total posts 169 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 157 total posts 111 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 138 total posts 75 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 479 total posts 62 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 59 total posts 59 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 62 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 48 total posts 45 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 116 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 181 total posts 30 posts