The Dark Knight Megathread (USE THIS! Love, the mods)

[Kaijufan]

I also doubt the X-Files will do better then the Dark Knight next weekend, but then again I doubt it needs to, I'm sure the X-Files has a much smaller budget then the Dark Knight.

[Harvey]

The X-Files, according to rumor, had a budget in the 30-50 million dollar range. The Dark Knight cost 180 million dollars, which puts it 3-6 times as expensive. And let's not forget the cost of marketing, which I'd estimate as being considerably greater in quantity for Batman than it has been for the X-Files.

I wouldn't be surprised if they both end up being equally profitable, although the Dark Knight is going to be a powerhouse for the rest of the month.

[Trekker4747]

Broccoli wrote:

---

I think someone said something similar about three prostitutes and their mom dethroning Indy, yet they did. So, you never know.

However, you're probably right.

Three prostitutes and their mom...

[David cgc]

^ "Sex and the City"

[Frontier]

Did anyone else catch this? At about 2 hours 9 minutes into the film, right after the ferry civilian remarks that "no one wants to get their hands dirty" and we go back to the fight between Bats and the Joker, Joker says, "Of all the old familair places..."

What of it, right?

Well, as far as I can tell, the line is from a song as I'm sure many of you know.

What really gets me is that the song is titled "I'll be seeing you"...

How prophetic to have Heath as the Joker say that, in hindsight.

[Broccoli]

Too much Batman love going on. He needs to be taken down a peg.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=9JxPoZVQ108

Hirogen Alpha wrote:

---

The X-Files, according to rumor, had a budget in the 30-50 million dollar range. The Dark Knight cost 180 million dollars, which puts it 3-6 times as expensive. And let's not forget the cost of marketing, which I'd estimate as being considerably greater in quantity for Batman than it has been for the X-Files.

I wouldn't be surprised if they both end up being equally profitable, although the Dark Knight is going to be a powerhouse for the rest of the month.

Oh, I'm not saying the film won't be profitable. I'm just saying it won't dominate the way Dark Knight is.

[OdoWanKenobi]

What about Step Brothers? Nobody can deny that Will Ferrel has a certain popularity.

[Captain Craig]

JacksonArcher wrote:

---

I've already seen it twice, once in regular theaters and once in IMAX. I am very tempted to see it a third time before the weekend is over.

I've also seen it like this.
I honestly can't say if I'll catch a third. I'm on the fence and if the right company wants to I'll go.
However this isn't the type movie demanding I go back. What action scenes are good on the big screen aren't that spectactular compared to other action fare. Its the acting that sells this movie and for another $10 I could wait for that on DVD come the holidays.

[Captain Craig]

Kaijufan wrote:

---

I also doubt the X-Files will do better then the Dark Knight next weekend, but then again I doubt it needs to, I'm sure the X-Files has a much smaller budget then the Dark Knight.

True X-Files will hope for a 2nd place finish and its budget is reported in the $35-40m range. A successful summer run for it would be easily $60-75m in total domestic take.

[Neroon]

JacksonArcher wrote:

---

I've already seen it twice, once in regular theaters and once in IMAX. I am very tempted to see it a third time before the weekend is over.

In your estimation, does the IMAX experience have an edge over the regular version, at least enough to warrant the extra cost?

[Trekker4747]

Neroon wrote:

---

In your estimation, does the IMAX experience have an edge over the regular version, at least enough to warrant the extra cost?

That's what I want to know. I want to see it in IMAX but I'm not sure it is worth it. I saw S:R in IMAX and I wasn't impressed.

Frankly, it made me think someone was playing with colorforms on the lenses of my (IMAX) glasses.

[Agent Richard07]

I'm not big on IMAX or seeing movies twice in the theatre, but I'm actually thinking about catching it on IMAX as well.

[Admiral_Young]

When I'm able to see the movie...in another month I'm hoping to see the movie at the IMAX theatre. Remember that Dark Knight was filmed using IMAX cameras in order to capture the best possible picture and they even had to improve the technology because what they were using wasn't quite right for some scenes. I heard a review on the radio that said that the IMAX experience was surpremly awesome and well worth the extra cost and the guy (Terry David Mulligan) said it translated well onto the normal theatre screens. He was blown away by it.

[Broccoli]

The IMAX picture was pretty good, clear, and crisp, especially the scenes shot in IMAX. You don't get glasses to watch the film as you don't need them. You only needed them with SR because some of the film was in 3D.

As for TDK, while the picture looked good, there was a LOT going on in each shot, especially the fight and action sequences. Like, Batman can be punching someone, but because it is so big, you might be looking at a different part of the screen when he does it. It can be a lot to take in.

This film probably doesn't "need" the IMAX as required viewing, however, I am glad that I did see it in IMAX, even if I was disappointed in the final product.

[JacksonArcher]

Neroon wrote:

---

In your estimation, does the IMAX experience have an edge over the regular version, at least enough to warrant the extra cost?

Absolutely. The entire film is not in the IMAX format -- many sequences, however, are -- but when the first frame opens, you'll be stunned. When I saw it, the entire audience started clapping and a bunch of my friends, including people I was sitting with, just started going "Wow".

The detail, the quality, it's incredibly crisp. I've seen the film three times now -- two in regular, one in IMAX -- and the viewing in IMAX was such an experience that I want to see it in that format again before it leaves theaters. It's just that awesome.