The Dark Knight

By acies
in The Media Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

acies

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Low & behold, the YouTube trailer here.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZqzL7Fc1gqM

** Warning **

Cam quality is pretty bad

I haven't seen it myself. Waiting for the HD version. Hopefully soon.

Yea I am going to wait too. It will officially be out this Sunday at:

http://www.whysoserious.com/happytrails/

Can someone explain what this Harvey Dent and President thing is?

Harvey Dent is the District Attorney of Gotham City. You can read all about his character on Wikipedia.

Grand Master

Rappy Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
Good news: The new Dark Knight trailer is very, very good. Bad news: You have to wait until Sunday to see it (officially).

As many of you will know, last night a global treasure hunt was held that led those who took part to cinemas where the new Dark Knight trailer was shown. We followed the trail of the London one and while there's not a huge amount to report 'from the ground', the sight of tens of Batman fans with faces painted in Joker slap was a bizarre one ? if rendered less frightening than it might have been by the giddy grins of the dashing throngs ? and the screening took place at Odeon Leicester Square. One fan was, slightly bizarrely, given the trailer film reel once the screen had faded to black. What he's supposed to do with this, we don't know. Are Warner Bros stealthily encouraging people to get the trailer on the web? Poor quality bootlegs are already showing up.

Unfortunately for those who weren't able to take part, the trailer won't be released officially until Sunday. It'll be at this site then. The delayed release seems to have been greeted with some displeasure by fans and is the one mis-step so far in this incredibly slick campaign.

Last night's treasure hunt required some fans to stay by their computers to relay clues to those running around town. Those who did that part of the task were rewarded with an extra five days of their friends bragging about seeing the trailer early. The expected release of the trailer once all the treasure hunts were over, which happened by the early hours of this morning, might have been a more popular solution and kinder on those who did half the work.

So, sorry, there are still a few more days until you can see the trailer in the kind of quality you would want. But what you see will be worth it. To describe it fully would spoil your enjoyment, but this is, again, all about The Joker, with Harvey Dent being brought in gradually and judiciously, and the Clown Prince of Crime is looking very bad in a very, very good way.

This Sunday then if you want to wait till official version.

Grand Master

Kev1n

Posted
Posted
This movie has some of the best movie posters I have seen in many years, I agree that some are looking very artificial, but the rest are just great pieces.

Hey sanctified what do you think of Chris Nolan?

I was talking to a friend who has a big interest in photography and he says Nolan is a very poor visual storyteller. I can't really grasp what he means but he had this to say

Now, the man sure does make very well constructed movies, but does anyone else think that visually, his movies have a horribly clumsy feeling? I'm not talking about the lighting or the 'look' of the movie, but the intangible feel and flow that is made up of shot composition, camera movement and editing. Compare a Spielberg film to a Nolan film and you'll get the gist of what I'm saying.

I'm not talking about individual shots and moments, its the overall feel of the film made up of those elements mentioned. Nolan's films have a laborious and clunky feel to them (in a not good way), Spielberg's (for the sake of this comparison) glide along with a distinctive silky smoothness.

I think Nolan is a talented actors director, but a poor visual director. In a way, Nolan is something of the reverse of post-American Graffiti George Lucas. I doubt its got anything to do with the technical team, it does seem to be more of an innate thing. Its the command of the film language as a medium, the intangible quality which makes a film filmic. Sergio Leone was probably the greatest exponent of this quality. All the great directors possess this x-factor (but not all directors who have this x-factor are great) and its always clear to see no matter the circumstances. Its the overall visual vibe we are talking about. His movies (to me and some people I know at least) do not have what I can best term as a visual rhythm, a pulse.

Now I know you dislike spielberg, but let's leave that out for a moment. :D He also says Nolan is an average action director, this which I agree, based on what we saw in Begins. The action was never a highlight of that film. It just wasn't executed well.

Grand Master

sanctified Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
Hey sanctified what do you think of Chris Nolan?

I was talking to a friend who has a big interest in photography and he says Nolan is a very poor visual storyteller. I can't really grasp what he means but he had this to say

Now I know you dislike spielberg, but let's leave that out for a moment. :D He also says Nolan is an average action director, this which I agree, based on what we saw in Begins. The action was never a highlight of that film. It just wasn't executed well.

I disagree. You cant seriosly say that Nolan visual narrative its weak after seeing movies like Memento and the Prestige, but I can quite understand what your friend its saying:

Spielberg has a great grasp of aesthetics, visual rethoric and most importantly, what the hollywood public wants, that is why he is so economically succesful but since both directors are heading in almost opposite directions about what they intent to do i think that your friend its comparing apples with oranges. Nolan`s visual narrative its intended to be primitive, minimalistic, sometimes almost at "Dogma 95" or Woody Allen levels, a clear example of that its the Memento black and white scenes.

That changed with Batman where the technique used was a little more conventional but not worse and his craftmanship really helps. I do get what Nolan tried to do with those ultra fast and blurry actions scenes in Batman Begins: A fight its fast, furious and ususally you get confused, all its just a quick blur, maybe his error its that he used visual methods that where more appropriate in an artistic film than in an action movie intended for hollywood, tipically an action director tries to glorify the violent parts of the movie creating a frieworks show rather than a plausible scenario. That its not necessarily bad, after all if that was the director?s original vision then its his prerogative, the downside its that the hollywood public its too used to this kind of action style that anything different will be questioned.

But then we got The Prestige, where the hybrid matured evidently. I dont know what your friend expected but the visuals worked as far as the plot allowed and in my opinion that is the true way to go, visuals can never be more important than the plot (something that Spielberg has done in the past) because visuals are just a narrative tool, not the story itself nor the movie itself (and when this happens, well, we got most hollywood movies, no substance).

I would invite your friend to watch both Noland and Spielberg movies with a critic eye. I know my dislike for most Spielberg works its quite known here, but I trully enjoy some of his movies, I truly do, he has some great sunday afternoon flicks that I can truly enjoy with a popcorn bag, something I cant do with Nolan since his films require attention to detail.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.