Dark Knight

[Gadget]

The Dark Knight has been 'arrested'.

Actually it's Christian Bale. He was arrested for 'assault on his mother and sister'. Oh well, another controversies over this movie, after Ledger's death.

[RedBlitz]

The Dark Knight has been 'arrested'.

Actually it's Christian Bale. He was arrested for 'assault on his mother and sister'. Oh well, another controversies over this movie, after Ledger's death.

Well dont think him as the bad guy quite yet... from what I hear it's from a "long running family dispute" so dont think this something recent and he just snapped all of a sudden. For all we know his mother(61) and sister(40) might have asked for that retribution.

[SNT1]

If it's a 'long running dispute', it's his family's chance to suck him $10000000 dry via lawsuits etc...

[Ryujin]

The Dark Knight has been 'arrested'.

Actually it's Christian Bale. He was arrested for 'assault on his mother and sister'. Oh well, another controversies over this movie, after Ledger's death.

Is this really relevant to the thread, speculating about the sordid details of an actor's private life rather than aspects of the movie? It's not like the film's going to magically alter itself because of this, and nothing but gossip-fodder's likely to come of it judging from the comments. Pfft, there are other forums more suited to such tabloid-ish fare.

Nevermind the Batpod. The Bat Tumbler was also equipped with machine guns and rocket launchers in its arsenal. Mind you, vehicle mounted weapons weren't his problem as much as the hand held guns that he tends to freak out over (at least when he's personally holding them, anyways).

Indeed. Every movie Batman (sans Adam West) has had heavily-armed Bat-vehicles. Heck, Tim Burton had the Batmobile chewing up doors with pop-up Browning machineguns & the Batwing firing on a crowded city street with Gatling guns & rockets. Makes one wonder if the various directors intentionally wanted to show this dichotomy (irony? hypocrisy?) between Batman's personal abhorrence of firearms and the weaponry on his vehicles. Granted, though, the comic-book Batmobiles usually didn't have anything as lethal--even Frank Miller's DKR version used nonlethal ( ) rubber bullets for ammunition.

It should also be noted that the earlier incarnations of Batman (especially pre-CCA) weren't as averse to criminals getting killed during their encounters as long as it wasn't Batman himself pulling the trigger of a gun. He sure didn't shed a tear for a dying Joe Chill after Chill's henchmen shot him up for 'creating' Batman. Bruce seemed quite satisfied with the outcome, as a matter of fact.

[duke4799]

Okay, so, in the comic series was it Chill or Joker that killed the Waynes? Did Tim Burton have it right or Christopher Nolan?

[aberrance]

Okay, so, in the comic series was it Chill or Joker that killed the Waynes? Did Tim Burton have it right or Christopher Nolan?

They both did. I believe, to my best knowledge, it was originally Chill, but later versions either directly said or insinuated that it was the Joker who did the deed.

[Battosai28]

Simply put, I loved this movie. My biggest complaint is the run time, but then again, I couldn't think of anything that should have really been cut out. I like to think of this as DC's answer to ironman and it is just as good. 4.5/5

[Oruma]

Simply put, I loved this movie. My biggest complaint is the run time, but then again, I couldn't think of anything that should have really been cut out. I like to think of this as DC's answer to ironman and it is just as good. 4.5/5

I have also watched both movies, and I personally felt that the Dark Knight has the dude in red and orange armor completely beaten; Ironman, for all his troubles and issues, felt like a walk in the garden compared to Bat's terrible mission. He can't quit, and allies are so hard to come by (this movie explained quite nicely why it's so difficult to be good: you can be bribed, threatened, or murdered oh so easily...in Gotham)

For the sequel, Mr. Victor Fries would be a delightful choice as the leading antagonist; or else a non-deformed, just crooked Penguin (like the later DCAU version) would be quite nice...or maybe both?

[Battosai28]

Simply put, I loved this movie. My biggest complaint is the run time, but then again, I couldn't think of anything that should have really been cut out. I like to think of this as DC's answer to ironman and it is just as good. 4.5/5

I have also watched both movies, and I personally felt that the Dark Knight has the dude in red and orange armor completely beaten; Ironman, for all his troubles and issues, felt like a walk in the garden compared to Bat's terrible mission. He can't quit, and allies are so hard to come by (this movie explained quite nicely why it's so difficult to be good: you can be bribed, threatened, or murdered oh so easily...in Gotham)

For the sequel, Mr. Victor Fries would be a delightful choice as the leading antagonist; or else a non-deformed, just crooked Penguin (like the later DCAU version) would be quite nice...or maybe both?

I completely agree with you that Batman had a greater struggle. Still, I liked Ironman about the same for different reasons. THe lighter tone of Ironman just makes these two films that much more difficult to compare.

[Phantomexe87]

The use of so many guns on his vehicles does seem hypocritical. I never got why they went with Batman being so anti-gun, at least, with less heavy censorship. His no-kill policy has also been taken to the extreme.

Villains aren't going to take him too seriously if they know he'd never kill. I recall him killing a whole bunch of league of shadow ninjas just in the last movie, ironically though.

[Aegis]

The most I recalled was beating them up and simply not saving them when the base blew up. Otherwise, I don't recall him ever killing anyone, intentionally anyways. Certainly, if he himself doesn't directly deliver the killing blow, he doesn't seem to care like he did with Ras, while actually running over the Joker or throwing him over the building is something else. Of course, then we have Harvey Dent. =/

[RedBlitz]

The thing is.. yes Batman uses guns, rochets etc... on his bike and super batmobile, BUT he doesnt use them to kill. He blows up walls, busts tires, makes trucks flip in the air etc...

He never uses gun on actual people, because it's almost impossible to just shoot at the guys weapon, legs, arms etc... without having to accidently killing someone once in a while. But when your blowing somes tires with machine guns, sure they might crash... but they probaly wont die.

Batman does use firearms to an extent just not on people, just on everything around them.

[Oruma]

The use of so many guns on his vehicles does seem hypocritical. I never got why they went with Batman being so anti-gun, at least, with less heavy censorship. His no-kill policy has also been taken to the extreme.

Villains aren't going to take him too seriously if they know he'd never kill. I recall him killing a whole bunch of league of shadow ninjas just in the last movie, ironically though.

Here's another thought: why don't they show Batman's iconic Batarangs more? Perhaps because this weapon is difficult to film, or considered unrealistic? Since I haven't seen Batman Begins, can anyone tell me if Batarangs are used often in the first film or not?

[Gadget]

Batatangs are more of the ol' Adam West Batman thingy. He usually use bat shape shrikens or explosive batrangs. And I don't think using batarangs are difficult to film. Afterall, they manage to get bats to 'fly' around Christian Bale.

Christer Nolan base Batman Begins more on Frank Miller's Batman:Year one and early Batman adventures like the Long Halloween. No Batrangs were used.

[RedBlitz]

He uses Baterangs in Batman Begins when he takes out Carmine Falcony's drug operations.

But I dont think I've seen him use them since.

[Oruma]

Well we've seen him stacking batarangs/bat-shaped shrikens, but I don't recall seeing them used.

[duke4799]

he uses them to break out the lights during the drug bust, as noted above. and the only other time I can recal them being used is on the train at the end. He's got three between his knuckles, like he's going to punch Ras with them. I think he uses them to break the controls on the train too.

[Aegis]

They're very rarely used weapons, though they've been used before. Frankly, though, the lack of batarangs doesn't hurt the film one bit, especially given the other gadgets he has in his disposal.

On a random note, given how much of a hit the movie is, I'm almost surprised there isn't such a huge discussion up to this point. >>

[Gadget]

On a random note, given how much of a hit the movie is, I'm almost surprised there isn't such a huge discussion up to this point. >>

He still got no Bar Armor.

Just to clear up about Batarangs. I am not refering to the type that will return to the thrower. And there is no Bat-line or Bat-cable attached to it.

When I mean Batrangs, they are more to 'knock out' people. Batman uses a lot of that weapon. And there is a story where he uses the Batrangs as twin daggers. And in many stories, the Batrangs are explosive tip. He uses on a robot. And once on an energy monster.

[mcred23]

Well, I just got back from seeing the movie and I'll cut things short and say it was great. I can't think of any issues I had with the film, even it's long length seemed to fly right by. The cast did a great job, Heath Ledger was chilling as the Joker, Bale was solid, and I think Maggie Gyllenhaal did a lot better job as Rachel over Katie Holmes.

So yeah, I loved it, and I'm hoping I can go see it at IMAX sometime this coming week.