-
Website
http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/ -
Original page
http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/news/joker-hah-harvey-dents-the-one-to-watch.php -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
Two Face popularity will definitely rise once Nolan complete his third movie. Though the Joker is still my favorite villain, Two Face is right below the Joker.
Joker. Still, I have to object to the author of this article referring to it as the "original"
Batman. I seem to remember a very cheesy 1966 movie and according to IMDB there was
another movie in 1943. Having not seen the earlier one I can speak for its quality and I'm
sure many die hard Dark Knight fans would like to forget the 1966 camp-fest, but let's give
credit where credit is due. The 1989 Batman may have been the first movie to take Bruce
and his alter ego seriously but it was in no way the "original."
I'd like to see the Joker become a constant thorn in Batman's side through the series, either engineering things on behalf of other villains, or just plain being nasty by his little ol' lonesome.
http://loresinger.com/Hourglass/gallery%20image...
And yes, Aaron Eckhart does a fantastic job, but Heath Ledger as the Joker is what everyone will remember about this movie.
So no more joker it will just mess up what heath did...
blah but he died. there is no way gordon would have staged his funeral after trying to kill
his entire family. they wouldnt' have faked a funeral to keep dents good memory they
would have blamed it on batman which is EXACTLY what they did. sorry no two face as a
villain in the next one. maybe the riddler...
i also think something more than a single rip at the end of the movie should have been
done. at least give each person who died there own slide instead of combining them
onto one. how about a picture as well to see the real heath ledger rather than have your
last memory of him as a sociopathic clown... i think he did an amazing job but
something more was needed to honor him especially since this is the role that pretty
much took his life.
http://www.comicvine.com/myvine/inferiorego/stu...
Look there. From the podcast mentioned, the Joker was supposed to be put on trial, and Two-Face would be a villain there. But, obviously you can't just do that with Heath gone.
Oh, and as for him being gone, the role did NOT take his life. For all of those who think the role brought some unmentioned demons that forced him to an overdose, you're wrong. It's already been clarified that it was just a mixture of pain killers and sleeping pills that combined to become lethal. Christian Bale also backs this.
http://www.usmagazine.com/christian-bale-blamin...
Check there.
In any case, there are no current plans for a sequel. Even after the death of Heath, it has already been noted that Nolan plans on a third movie, but he does not want to do it right away. Between being currently overdone on Batman, and the Ledger death, he will try and do other things. But rest assured, another Nolan-produced caped crusader flick is sure to come.
I really wanted to comment on something else. Meg, I don't think you should make a statement like that, this role "took his life." We don't know all of the facts that truly surrounded his life or death. And that is the way it should be, because it is none of our business. Much like the bogus Bale story on Tuesday, we should not speculate without a true frame of reference. Plus, that statement inherently puts some sort of blame in the wrong place. His death was a tragic loss, more so for his family and friends, and not related to a movie role.
Heath made it so believable.
Oh and I totally agree with you Tommyboy about Heaths personal life not being any of our business. People need to think back at how wonderfull the effort put in by Heath was in each of his roles throught out his career instead of just looking at his death and speculating. It was a HUGE loss especially for Australia and the whole filming industry to lose such a down to earth guy with a heart for acting. Woulda loved to meet him.
R.I.P Heath Ledger
I'm so glad to see that Harvey will continue to be in the sequel, I also really like how sympathetic they make his character. I still think Dr.Freeze's character still takes the cake for most loveable though.
Heath's performance was good and all, but he wasn't really in the film so much, so I don't get why everyone is making such a big deal about it. Bale's performance wasn't that amazing either, but I really liked how Eckhart was portrayed.
"how about a picture as well to see the real heath ledger rather than have your
last memory of him as a sociopathic clown"
-Meg
Actually, this wasn't his last movie. He was working on another movie called The Imaginarium or something, when he had passed.
middle of production when he passed and they had to cast 3 actors to fill his role after
death.
And since there is so much speculation over who died and will the Joker return and all that... supposing that the Joker was in the sequel, who do you think would take the role? I'm racking my brain but it would be so hard to fit a role that everyone already knows.
complex. the one in batman forever is dope but hes too "funny"
there needs to b one that isnt crazy like joker and that can leave people thinking through
the whole movie...can any of u comic nerds give me a character that u think would b dope
in the next batman movie??
"I would also like to see them bring Catwoman on board, she would fit in Nolan’s vision of keeping his version of Batman in the real world without being implausible, say like Mr. Freeze or the Penguin."
I don't really know if you are saying Mr.Freeze and Penguin are implausible or if you are saying that they are plausible like Catwoman. If you were saying Penguin is implausible then I disagree because wasn't his condition just a defect? Correct me if I'm wrong though. Either way, I do agree that Nolan should keep the movie's going with more realistic character's rather then character's such as the Man Bat.
I would absolutely love for Catwoman to come back into play. However, I do think that if she ever does, they should choose an actress with talent, like Michelle. Rather than Halle Berry who's.. well... pathetic and was chosen for her looks alone. Michelle is still hot and a fantastic actress. I loved her portrayal as the Catwoman and I think that it would be awesome if they chose her for the part again, assuming they bring the cat back that is.
I have little criticism about this movie. I absolutely loved it. My only complaint at the moment is the CGI used for Two-Face's face. Everything has to look so flashy and real in movies these day's that they make some thing's look rediculous. I am more content with Tommy Lee's face as Two-Face then Eckharts. It may just be me and my friends who feel this way but we would of been more satisfied with some uber-tastic make-up effect's on his face as opposed to the CGI they used for the Two-Face. I'm also aggitated at the fact that his right eye wasn't seared or anything but what can ya do ^_^ It's lame but it bug's me a lot.
Anyway's, fantastic movie. Fantastic cast. All of it just fantastic. I can't wait for the next one!
Oh and wasn't the pencil trick just fantastic as well!
I realize that the director wanted to put emphasis on the idea that anyone can fall with just the right 'incentive'. Good and bad exist in everyone, blah, blah. But, as much as he would like to underscore this off screen, it's not going to make up for the fact that this became a minor factor on-screen. They just didn't go a great job at fulfilling their goal if it was to make Harvey Dent's story the main focus. The Joker really took this film and made it what it was.
But, it has to be said that I'm really not a Batman fan. I didn't see Batman Begins, and I don't really plan to. So I like to believe that I'm not biased about this film. The outstanding reviews I had read about Ledger's performance is what finally spurred me into going to see it, after having previously turned my nose up at it. It took me a while to realize that the movie was supposed to be about Batman.
It's possible I'll go to see the next one, but I kind of doubt it. I think this film was good as a stand-alone movie, even without seeing the first one, and I would hate to see such an awesome movie be tarnished by the Hollywood tendency to squeeze every last penny out of a series.
I do agree that part of it wasn't especially realistic. Without an eyelid, his eye would soon dry up and be blinded, if I remember correctly. Which, it's entirely possible that I don't, but whatever. And, yes, it's hard to believe that his jaw bone could have been so severely seared as to expose bone and gum, but his eye wasn't. Overall, though, I think that the make up was about as realistic as you can get for a burn victim without being ...well, I was going to say horribly grotesque, and it was a bit of a shock, but not nearly as much as it would be on a real human face. I liked this portrayal of him. I may not be a Batman fan, but I did some character research after the movie piqued my curiosity.
Someone COULD survive with that severe degree of burns and live with a partially exposed face. And really, what else could he look like? His face was covered in fuel, which caught on fire after the explosion. In real life, he'd be pretty lucky to have any skin at all there.
Just pointing it out. :) Thanks.
Heath's performance was stupendous. Mezmerizing.
Always remember, Indepedence Day is awesome.