Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by Agent Richard07, Jul 8, 2008.
Should have just killed her. It's lame when they throw in some love story.
All a matter of opinion, I suppose. I think Maggie Gyllenhaal is an excellent actress and can stand up with the other acting giants, unlike Katie Holmes who was merely passable and looked pale in comparison to said acting giants.
I understand that, but I have faith in both Christopher Nolan and Maggie Gyllenhaal making it work.
Maggie is a far superior actress to Katie Holmes and much better looking to boot. A very welcome change for me.
The problem isn't MG nor KH...it was the character of Rachel Dawes and how she was written.
I understand that, but I have faith in both Christopher Nolan and Maggie Gyllenhaal making it work.[/quote]
I disagree on both parts. While their acting talent is probably on par with one another, there is something about MG that I just can't stand.
I will grant this, KH did look a tad too young to believably play the role of a Asst. District Attorney. MG looks age-appropriate for it.
On a complete sidenote, I wonder if they'll ever incorporate the Rachel Dawes character into the comics. I guess it depends on whatever happens to her (if anything) in the Nolan series.
Massive spoiler pictures save them while you can!
Nurses outfit or purple suit?
HUBBA HUBBA HUBBA MONEY MONEY MONEY!!
So do I. I was about to check what times it will screened tomorrow and remembered it doesn't open until tomorrow week here.
100% so far at RT
Not that I've read one way or another, but I think they will in the new movie.
What I want to know is who is the reviewer who is going to tread all over the posthumous praise of not only Ledger but dare to criticize to real degrees any flaws the film does have?
The build-up of buzz about Heath is overtaking the film to the point where I wonder if we can truly get an unbiased review.
I've no doubt its a fantastic piece of cinema, I just fear the rose colored goggles are preventing a more routine critique of the movie due to the circumstances.
While I agree the execution of the Rachel character in the first movie wasn't the greatest, I do think she served an important role in the story. She was far more than just a "love interest" in that movie.
Besides, I thought it was nice seeing someone ELSE from Bruce's past besides just... Alfred and his parents. That dynamic has been explored to death already.
I do like the fact that she balanced Bruce out, but I thought the whole love angle was completely tacked on at the end there. I couldn't buy it at all. Up until that point, I got nothing from their relationship other than being childhood friends.
I'm far more afraid of people who dislike the movie using this as an excuse.
See that there shows the level of reverence already attributed to this.
"If you find something to criticize and you do it, something is wrong with you"
People don't need an excuse if they adequately convey their gripe.
Just having a gripe or two doesn't mean that individual still doesn't find the piece as a whole enjoyable.
Its like TDK is the Obama of the cinema world.
Don't you dare talk bad about it.
Every movie, no matter how acclaimed, will have some bad reviews. Just like how even the worst movies will find someone who liked it to whore out his or her quote on the DVD cover. There are agenda critics out there who will bash any movie that doesn't fall into line with their "moral" or "political" or "cultural" beliefs, or overpraise movies because they do fit the bill they're pushing.
Maybe the guy who gave a positive review to Dungeon Siege will find something wrong with The Dark Knight.
Hell, Rotten Tomatoes used the "review" of Mission: Impossible III from some nobody on the internet who bashed the movie for the sake of bashing Tom Cruise, even though if you read what he said it was obvious that he never even saw the movie.
Whoa, that's going to happen but don't attribute it to me. My point was exactly as you said, "People don't need an excuse if they adequately convey their gripe." Any discussion about the movie is going to instantly become irritating the moment people start bringing the hype in as some sort of 'reason' for their opinion. For either side of the argument, which doesn't need to be an argument in the first place. I hate that kind of fanboy entrenchment.
I'm going to miss seeing "The Dark Knight" on opening night next weekend because of my recovery from foot surgery. I have no idea when I'll be comfortable to risk going to the theatre...being pysched for "The Dark Knight" since the end of "Batman Begins" when that Joker card was flipped over, still remember hearing all the gasps and shouts of glee when people recognized it was the Joker! Looking forward to seeing Heath's performance as the Joker even despite the hype and high praise reviews he's getting...look I see it this way, if every critict is giving positive reviews over it then it must be something worth seeing right? Also looking forward to seeing Maggie as Rachel, liked Katie Holms in "Dawsons Creek" but her performance was kind of bland and unconvincing to me. As I've said in many other Batman Begins threads I would have perferred to have seen Taila as the love interest/human achor in that movie. Damn...I'll probably have to wait a couple of weeks and do my best to avoid spoilers.
Did anyone save those Two-Face pics?
I saved 3 of them
Separate names with a comma.