Nolan will direct again. Robin Williams wants to play the Joker, though others are being considered.
Oh, please. I'd rather see Willam DaFoe. Robin Williams latest films have all bombed...he's washed up!
Or better yet...choose another villain.
IMHO: I STILL think Jack Nicholson was THE JOKER and NOBODY will be able to beat that performance!
Dafoe would be hampered by just having recently played the Green Goblin, a similar but different role.
Williams is an interesting choice; I don't think he's washed up, just mired in a lot of bad film choices. I would like to see his interpretation of the character.
Other Choices I Wouldn't Mind Seeing:
*Denis Leary. I just don't think he can do the laugh, though.
*I am fairly certain Paul Giamatti could do the job, but I would always associate him as a nebbish loser. His "Sideways" co-star, Thomas Haden Church, similarly could do a good job, but plays too many idiots to make the part palatable.
*If he wasn't so beefy, I'd like to see Vincent D'Onofrio try the role.
*I don't want him to play the role, but I always wondered what Johnny Depp would do with the part.
*Joaquin Phoenix looks the part, but could he do it? That's another story.
*Billy Bob Thornton...not a traditional Joker, but definitely able to pull off charming, insane, and lethal.
*Finally, my really offbeat part: Bernie Mac.
MikeC: His "Sideways" co-star, Thomas Haden Church, similarly could do a good job, but plays too many idiots to make the part palatable.
See how he does as Sandman. I'm sure Nolan will figure something out.
But Sandman is an idiot!
Interestingly, John, Dafoe was my choice for years, long before he played Osborn. But if the writing is done well enough that the character is made sufficiently distinct, the fact that he played Osborne, Mike, doesn't have to be a problem. Ditto for casting Williams. Sure, he's had some crappy movies lately (I thought The Night Listener, which is being released in August, was poorly structured, and needed a rewrite or a major edit), but all the lousy movies in the world won't matter if this one is good.
No, I guess not, but I just wonder if the temptation to play it the same (same laugh, same craziness) will be too much for an actor.
I'd rather see Williams play the Riddler.
I agree Scott. In fact I believe he was almost cast in "Batman Forever" before Jim Carrey struck it big.
I want them to find someone new to play The Joker. Much like they found someone new to play Batman. Actually, I would love them to not actually USE the Joker at all, although I think given the last scenes of the first film this seems unlikely. To me it's the same with Superman. Why do they always have to use Lex Luther? Surely in 60+ years Supes has faced off against a number of different villians?
Actually, in case of Supes, it's interesting in that 60+ years, Luthor is one of the few marquee villains that Supes has faced. He certainly has a lot of interesting ones: Toyman, Prankster, Myxtlpk, Bizarro, General Zod, but I dunno--the Superman Rogues Gallery has never been a particularly scintillating one. So I'll give them a break--Luthor's the man and was one of the highlights of "Superman Returns" anyway.
Now, Bats, I'm in agreement here. Unfortunately, if you're rebooting Bats, you really need to have a marquee villain and certainly the Joker IS the marquee villain. When you say "someone new," do you mean a new actor--i.e., not Nicholson? Or do you mean an unknown? Because Christian Bale was not an unknown.
I mean an unknown. I had never heard of Christian Bale, and let's face it, most people knew Keaton, Kilmer and Clooney when they got the part.
I strongly doubt that Jack would be remotely interested in playing the joker again.
It does appear that casting unknowns with Superman and (to a lesser degree, perhaps) Batman can have benefits, as they do not carry all the baggage associated with being a pre-existing huge or recognizable star like Clooney or Kilmer.
True. But the Superman series wisely realized that the audience would not accept an ENTIRE cast of unknowns and thus dropped in Oscar-winner Gene Hackman as the villain (and later Oscar-winning Kevin Spacey as the villain).
Bale may not be a marquee name, but he's at least had a tidy resume.
A lesser known actor, not necessarily and unknown. Though I'm guessing this movie raised his star a bit.
Now who's going to be cast to play Harley Quinn? We can't have the Joker without her.
If the movie continues the era of Batman's early years, I doubt they'd have Harley in it, unless they intend to deviate from the comics. They could do that, of course, but given the serious tone of the first film, I think having HQ in it might jeopardize that.
Joker was good without her before '92, he can be good after as well. IMHO.
One name and one name only pops into my mind when I hear Harley Quinn...
...Gwen Stafani!
Why not? She's conquered music, she's branched out to fashion-- acting is the next logical choice for exposure, just as Madona, Cher, and Beyonce did before her.
As for Joker, how about Mark Hamil? He's voiced the character for years in some of the animated series.
I don't know about Mark Hamil. His face is too round I think. He need an actor with more of an angler face with more of a pointed chin for the Joker. But I like the thought of Gwen Stafani for Harley Quinn. Besides she is HOT!!!!!
I thought of Mark Hamill for the Joker myself. IMO, it's not so important what the actor looks like, or even how old he is. It's a matter of how well the part is written, and what the actor can do with the character.
Hamill has voiced the character for years. He'd be able to take it over the top. I'd bet he'd have a great time with the role. Besides, I'd get a kick out of seeing what Batman would do wif the Joker whipped out a lightsaber...
I'd rather see a "Batman Begins" sequel focus on a villain we haven't already seen in other "Batman" movies (e.g. Joker, Penguin, Catwoman, Riddler, Two-Face, Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy). I liked the allusion to The Joker at the end of "Batman Begins", but I don't want to see a new series of Batman movies with "been there, done that" villains. I also don't want to see these movies shift the focus from the Batman/Bruce Wayne character to the villains. Incidentally, one of the ways to keep that from happening is to avoid casting iconic name actors in the villain roles (e.g. Al Pacino is "The Joker"!), especially when the hero is played by an actor who is not an iconic name actor (at least in the U.S.).
They've pretty well used all of the biggest villains in the Batman roster, though, Ryan. I'm not sure who's left?
Clayface, Hush (maybe), Black Mask, The Ventriloquist, and Killer Croc, perhaps? Not exactly 'Best-of-the-best,' mind you... but I could see Clayface having some potential...
Adapting Hush (the storyline) would be awesome. But it would be in current continuity, rather than in Batman's early years, and would entail his entire roster.
I liked Hush. Aside from Hush himself.
I know somebody who would be perfect as the psychotic, irrational, looney Joker.
Of course, one of his main props would be a couch.
And Oprah.
Is Tom Cruise available for the roll?
They've pretty well used all of the biggest villains in the Batman roster, though, Ryan. I'm not sure who's left?
How about Shame or Egghead?J
I admit that the A-list of Batman villains was pretty much run though with the earlier Batman movies. The problem for me in using them again is that those movies weren't that long ago (1989, 1992, 1995, and 1997). Plus, I don't want to see a new series of Batman movies which are basically better versions of the Burton/Schumacher directed Batman movies.
As dumb as it sounds, there are worse actors to play the Joker than Cruise.
Heather Ledger's been offered the part.
I assume you mean Heath.
Ack!
Unless brokeback mountain changed him more than we thought? ;-)
I was thinking that, but wasn't going to say it
We go where others fear to tread. :-)
Heather Ledger could be the Joker and Heather Locklear can be Harley Quinn.
The title will be The Dark Knight. Heath Ledger confirmed as the Joker.
I've retitled the board to reflect the title of the movie, so if you're looking for the board for the Batman Begins sequel, now you know what it's called.
Aaron Eckhart as Harvey Dent.
Maggie Gyllenthal is cast as Rachel Dawes and Sarah Michelle Gellar is rumored to portray Harley Quinn. Frankly, I can see Maggie Gyllenthal physically more as Harley Quinn than Gellar, but either way is cool. It's not as if Sarah's been exhausting herself with work these days. I mean...
SPOILER!
Her character from The Grudge falling to her death within the first 15 miutes of The Grudge 2 kind of symbolizes the direction of her acting career. Maybe she'll try to get her beau Freddie Prinz, Jr., cast as The Riddler (:
Spelling nit: It's "Maggie Gyllenhaal."
The Joker and his Rubix Cube of doom... :-)
Sheesh... IMHO... That's LOUSY! Batman Dead End did better than that... so did Grayson... in fact, I think just about every Batman fanfilm out there did better than this! (Not that I was a huge fan of the Jack Nicholson version...) I guess it's just hard to portray that inhuman grin with a human actor, no matter what the makeup... so they just didn't bother. This guy looks more like Frankenjoker...
The hair's decent, at least. Who knows- maybe in the propper lighting, this- minus the mouth, which still looks too 'normal' to me- might work well. We shall see...
I've read that it's a fake.
I'll see if I can find the link.
Different picture of the Joker here, creepy.
http://tunaflix.com/?p=473
OKay, now THAT's just freaky!
Anthony Michael Hall is in. No word on his role, which I find intriguing.
And while it's kinda old news, it hasn't yet been mentioned on this board that Eric Roberts will be playing a mafia boss.
Interesting. Looks a little over-techy to be the classic Batman suit, but also intruiging. We shall see how it looks in motion...
There's a Bat-cycle in the film, though they're calling it the Bat pod. I have no idea why the plot requires it, but there's a shot of Batman on it here, and a daytime shot of it by itself here.
More and higher-res shots can be seen on Christian Bale's site.
I hope that new costume of his is bullet-proof, because he's wide open driving that thing. Hate to say it, but...naw, I don't hate to say it...I like the tv series cycle a hundred times better than this globby thing. Looks like they were trying to replicate the chunkiness of the tumbler here, but it's nothing special to me (just my opinion-- I won't tell anyone that likes it that he or she is nuts). It looks like a cross between the tumbler, a John Deere lawn mower and a Return Of The Jedi forest bike speeder.
Anthony Michael Hall as Riddler?
Lots of images and promo material, including the teaser trailer.
Well, he's no Mark Hamil... but I like the sound of the Joker in the teaser. It sounded... 'right' for him.
A six or seven minute preview will be shown in IMAX theaters showing I Am Legend.
I'm not sure what the point of this is, but according to iwatchstuff.com, it's supposed to be Warner Brothers' viral Joker website.
I mean, is there something else there that you can access via some type of easter egg? Or are they going to add stuff to it?
Info on the opening scenes of the film. Obviously, this is a SPOILER.
Environmental problems complicate filming.
8 new websites.
My favorites are thegothamtimes.com, thehahahatimes.com, and whysoserious.com/personalityprofile/, the latter two of which I thought were funny. If you have Firefox, you can have the first two open in two different tabs, and compare the differences.
A more explicit poster, and another production still showing Bale in front of the Batsuit.
Had they finished shooting all of Heath Ledger's scenes before he died?
I think so. There was talk that his voiceovers weren't done, though.
I remember reading somewhere that his actual filming is complete. I haven't heard anything about voiceover work, though.
As long as the movie is still in editing their can well be some ADR (Automated Dialog Replacement) work to be done. Epically on a film like this that's heavy on stunts and special effects as things like traffic, explosions and stunt rigs can often drown out the dialog. They can deal with that a number of ways, from grabbing bits of audio from alternate takes of the scenes to hiring a vocal artist to imitate him.
According to AICN, Heath had completed all of his work, including ADR, on Dark Knight before his death.
Wow, some people have a lot of time on their hands.
And a lot of Legos.
That poster may have one of, if not THE best cast I've ever seen.
I like it a lot. Also like Maggie Gyllenhaal as Rachel better than the very cute and totally not professional looking Katie Holmes.
HOLY COW!!!
Okay, first off, this may qualifier as a SPOILER. It's a possible concept art piece of a certain character who isn't the main villain in the film, and I assume will be the main villain in the next film, but whom I'm guessing may be glimpsed in this one, maybe at the end. By now, you probably know who it is, but I'm putting you on notice because it's not only a possible spoiler, but pretty GROSS-looking too, the way that character SHOULD look! Click if you dare!
Luigi, I knew exactly who you were talking about. The trailer kind of tips it in one of the last shots. No not the guy, but his famous prop.
I didn't see the prop in question. Did you "flip" when you saw it? 
Yes I did to coin a phrase. I only saw it in one version of the trailer.
I'm sorry, the city's milk supply was loaded with pyschotropic drugs... and when the ice cream truck hits the city center, it'll explode
A Flash-heavy comcast site has been set up with three making-of featurettes on the film.
Spoiler-free review of the film by Peter Travers of Rolling Stone.
He apparently loved it, and gave it three and a half out of four stars.
SPOILERS, PROCEED AT YOUR OWN RISK!
I'm a bit surprised that I'm the first person to post. The movie was excellent! I thought the previous one was just ok, I don't much care for Bale as Batman, but this one was much better IMHO. Even though I knew Heath was the Joker I still couldn't believe it. He rivaled Jack's protrayal and played the role incredibly.
Because I keep forgetting to write things down when I see or think of them I'll just mention a couple plot points I thought was odd for now:
Harvey Dent gets deformed and the Joker, the man who tried to kill him and succeeded with Rachael, convinces him to go on a vendetta somehow. Sure he's mad that he lost Rachael but is that enough to kill an innocent child? That seemed like a stretch to me, much like how easily Anakin Skywalker became Darth Vader. Plus, at no time did Gordon or Batman say they meant to save Rachael first but the Joker switched the addresses.
At the end, in order to save Harvey's reputation, Batman decides to take the heat for his death and those he killed. Why the hell does he do that!? Blame it on the dam-n Joker, who is essentially at fault for all of them anyway! That made as much sense as Batman letting the Joker live, especially since he won't be in the next movie.
A few minor (possible) nits: I wouldn't think a standard RPG would do so much damage to the batmobile; Batman performs several unassisted jumps from high points and lands uninjured; when the Joker falls from the building, he falls quite a bit and Batman tethers him without even tearing his clothes. Enjoy the flick everybody!
"At the end, in order to save Harvey's reputation, Batman decides to take the heat for his death and those he killed. Why the hell does he do that!? Blame it on the dam-n Joker, who is essentially at fault for all of them anyway! That made as much sense as Batman letting the Joker live, especially since he won't be in the next movie."
I was also confused by the blame game. It's not as if there are only two people to blame: Two-Face or Batman. Could also blame an imposter Batman wantabe.
However, I don't mind Batman letting Joker live. They are supposed to be arch-enemies for a long time. In fact I wanted Two-Face to be around longer. Heroe movies in the past few years seem to have gotten into the habit of creating a villian only to destroy him.
Did they digitally alter Bale's voice in this one to make it sound deeper? Sounded kind of fake to me. In the first one, it actually sounded like Bale was lowering his voice himself. Either he changed in the second film or the sound guys did.
quote:Terik: Heroe movies in the past few years seem to have gotten into the habit of creating a villian only to destroy him.
Josh M: Did they digitally alter Bale's voice in this one to make it sound deeper? Sounded kind of fake to me.
I don't believe Bale's voice was altered, didn't sound that way to me anyway. I do however think that when Bruce is purposefully talking different as Batman it sounds lame, like he's a life-long chain smoker or something. Not at all intimidating IMO.
Does anybody know where this movie was filmed, the Gotham parts anyway? It looked to me that much of was in Chicago, the scenes near the river gave it away, but I'm not sure about that. The scene in Hong Kong was pretty cool. I didn't read much of the Batman comics but was Gotham really that big and had as many skyscrapers?
I too would've liked to have seen Two-Face in the next movie, especially after seeing his make-up job, incredible! Why not have Joker reveal that he turned Harvey and then nobody find him, but still killing the bad cops?
"Batman movies have never shied away from killing the villains off. Joker, Penguin, Two-Face, all gone in their first appearances. Personally, I think that's acceptable for a movie format, where there's less time to tell the story and easier to make things fresh with changes every time."
I didn't want Joker or the others to die in the other movies. They are all supposed to be thorns in the side of Batman. Like Luther to Superman. Often, the villian makes the movie so why kill him off? It lets us dream of a day when villians will join together and make a great movie. At least in the 1st Batman movies the baddies were around for most of the movie. In the new movie, Two-Face came & went.
It was similar to Venom in SM III. Doom in F4 was on the edge of this. He was around but really didn't do anything other than get bad & 'die'.
quote:inblackestnight: Does anybody know where this movie was filmed, the Gotham parts anyway? It looked to me that much of was in Chicago, the scenes near the river gave it away, but I'm not sure about that. The scene in Hong Kong was pretty cool.
"I was also confused by the blame game. It's not as if there are only two people to blame: Two-Face or Batman. Could also blame an imposter Batman wantabe."
I believe that Batman/Wayne and Gordon agree to blame Batman for Two-Face's crimes because they want to protect Dent's legacy, and they don't want to cover up the murders Dent commits as Two-Face, but the two would probably find it morally unacceptable to blame an innocent third party (or third parties) for Dent's murders, even if The Joker was the designated fall guy. That's not to say that there aren't still plausability problems with the idea of Batman killing a few people in the manner in which Two-Face kills his victims.
"but the two would probably find it morally unacceptable to blame an innocent third party"
Good point, but what if they simply told the public that the criminal is unknown & the crimes are being investigated? Would that be moral? Would someone do some digging to discover the truth?
Either way, the Joker could somehow expose the truth.
Best comic book film of all time. Easily. That's really all I can say. I'm hoping the next film adapts Dark Victory in some manner.
The Joker is not innocent, no matter how you look at it, and he certainly isn't concerned with protecting the people he has in his employ, proven by the bank robbery. He had to have known somebody would eventually find the identity of the dirty cops and take care of them, especially since told Harvey who they are. He planned to knock Dent down a few pegs by killing his woman only to send him on a killing spree and have Batman stop him, and possibly kill him. So by Bats taking the blame is, in a way, playing right into the Joker's hand.
Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker was mind-blowing. However, I wish he'd utilized the laugh a lot more.
POSSIBLE NIT:
When the Joker is hanging upside-down, why isn't the camera showing him upside-down? They shot Heath hanging right-side-up.
(Granted, it's difficult to watch an actor hanging upside-down, but that's not the point, the point is to make the movie look as realistic as possible.)
quote:John A. Lang: Granted, it's difficult to watch an actor hanging upside-down, but that's not the point, the point is to make the movie look as realistic as possible.
In brief: A brilliant urban epic, if a bit too long.
Well, what needs to be said by me that everyone else already hasn’t? When Batman Begins came out, I regarded it as the best Batman movie ever (the only one I really liked, actually), and one of the best three superhero friends ever, along with the original Donner/Reeve Superman, and Spider-Man 2. The Dark Knight presents a bit of a necessity for hairsplitting, because if we insist on maintaining a top three (Why not a Top Four? I dunno. People like trinities. Just bear with me, okay?), I’m not entirely willing to bump Batman Begins off the list and replace it with Dark Knight. Then again, I’m not entirely willing to say that Begins is better than Dark Knight. For one thing, I don’t know if it’s right to compare an origin story with a Joker/Two-Face story. For another thing, I don’t know if The Dark Knight’s keeps it from my Top Three.
I’ve seen movies in excess of two hours whose running times were not only justified by the story, but even imperceptible as I was watching them, and I’m left wondering if my feelings about Dark Knight’s length are based more on expectations based on previous films than whether its content merited the running time. I knew for weeks that it was two and a half hours, so it’s not like it was a surprised. It just genuinely felt long in a way that I didn’t think it would. Maybe if I try to rethink the film’s three act structure so that the final act begins with Harvey Dents’ disfigurement, it can work. Maybe on subsequent viewings, I’ll warm up more to the running time. Perhaps then, instead of reacting to the film based on previous such films, I’ll be able to see the film for what it is: A sprawling urban epic, with a greater ambition than the prior film. But even if I do, this post is going to be about my reaction now, so I have to be honest about that, and I can’t shake the feeling that some areas could’ve been compressed. The entire sequence in which Bruce journeys to China to get Lau could’ve consisted of Fox mentioning the CIA’s “Operation Tailhook” plan, and then the implementation of the plan by Batman. Harvey’s taking out Maroni and that female detective could’ve been cut a bit.
That said, can I put aside its length to talk about how otherwise awesome the film is?
You betcha!
The Dark Knight is a beautiful adaptation. Whereas the previous films was the best “introductory” adaptation of Batman and his origin, this film is the best adaptation of the Joker and Two-Face, one that met and exceeded all the expectations I ever had for the Joker over the years. You see, for decades, the comic book creators have made Batman a darker, more psychologically complex character. While Tim Burton’s treatment of the character followed through with that atmosphere (if not with a strong characterization or decent script), I never felt the same had been appropriate done with the Joker. My feeling is that if the Joker is a pure psychopath, much like Hannibal Lechter, and that any proper depiction of him, including a feature film adaptation, must make him as terrifying as Lechter, and hopefully more complex like him, so that the viewer genuinely feels that this character is DANGEROUS. I’m not a fan of Cesar Romero’s buffoon, or anything else that came out of that awful 60’s TV show, and despite the hype heaped on Jack Nicholson’s rendition of the character, I never saw him as much different from Romero’s, the main distinction being that his Joker actually was allowed to kill people, except that no one we cared about was killed or seriously injured.
Writers Christopher Nolan, David Goyer and Jonathan Nolan, much as they did with Batman Begins, took the comic book, and adapted it in an organic manner, essentially answering the question, “If Batman in his rogues gallery were real, what would it realistically look like in real life?” The result is a brilliantly frightening villain that lets the viewers know up front that this is not some cardboard bad guy who will be wrapped up with some facile fisticuffs. One critic whose review I heard before today said that this Joker was a maniac whose crimes present actual moral dilemmas for Batman, and he was right. This is a sociopath who insinuates himself into the corruption of Gotham’s police, exploiting the paranoia that comes with not knowing who to trust, the kind of paranoia that you see in well made mafia films in which the hero must contend with the possibility that his own ostensible colleagues may be in working with his mobster enemies. At least two critics have opined that Heath Ledger deserves a posthumous Oscar for his portrayal. I don’t disagree, but I would be remiss if I jumped on that bandwagon without pointing out that the success of this Joker is not simply performance-oriented, but writing-oriented, and that credit should not be taken away from Goyer and the two Nolans, who have created the best superhero movie villain ever, better than Lex Luthor, or any of the Spider-Man film antagonists.
Similar praise is deserved for Two-Face, of tying the Joker into his origin, and of not simply setting up Harvey to be the villain in the next film (as I assumed would be the case), but instead incorporating him as a vital part of the film’s themes and character arcs. Given the Jokers' goal of trying to prove that everyone is potentially as crazy as he is, I wondered if this plot point was inspired by Alan Moore's Batman graphic novel The Killing Joke. I also thought that establishing him to have been in Gotham's internal affairs was a nice way to explain where he gets his nickname from.
The writers also continue to display their understanding of Bruce Wayne/Batman. The revelation that Bruce used the city’s cell phones as monitoring devices nicely paralleled the Orwellianism he exhibited in recent years in the comic books, specifically how he was revealed during Mark Waid’s run on JLA (IIRC) to have had contingency plans in place to “take out” his fellow Justice Leaguers in case they went bad, and how he lost trust in his fellow supers after finding out, following the events of the miniseries Identity Crisis, that they tampered with his memories, and created a spy satellite, Brother Eye, to monitor all the metahumans on Earth. The conflict between him and Lucius Fox, who ended up quitting as a result, was a nice way to show actual negative consequences of his paranoia.
The writers have created a film whose plot is driven directly by the machinations of the villain’s amoral lunacy, and the desperate attempts of Batman and the Gotham police to thwart him, and whose structure is a brilliant series of surprise reversals of fortune that had me genuinely wondering what would happen next. The ruse involving Jim Gordon’s death, for example, had me genuinely fooled into thinking that the writers made the bold move of killing him off, genuinely surprised when he turned up alive, and genuinely in awe when we found out that the Joker’s capture was a part of the Clown Prince’s plan all along. How I managed to not see this, when they basically telegraphed it by having Lau sitting in Gotham’s lockup, is a testament to the brilliance of the writer’s misdirection (something learned by the Nolans, perhaps during their work on The Prestige—wink, wink). By the end of the film, the Joker has not merely been beaten. His moral challenge to Batman and the population of Gotham City—and to humanity—has been answered, in a way that shows that as a character, Batman too, much like Superman, can be about hope, and not just darkness and fear.
The art direction and design was as solid as the previous film. The batpod, for example, about which I was provisionally skeptical during the film’s pre-publicity, pleasantly surprised me, as it was a legitimate part of the story, and a cool one at that. The effects of Two-Face's face was unbelievable. Hell, I saw publicity shots of it months ago, and I was still astounded by how he looked!
The one thing I disagreed with was Batman and Gordon’s decision at the very end of the film to implicate Batman for Two-Face’s five murders in order to preserve Harvey Dent’s image as Gotham’s “one true hero”. For one thing, Batman has always struck me as more conservative with regards to his views of crime and crime fighting. Everyone has the power to make choices, and the responsibility to accept the consequences for them. Harvey made his choice, and he chose, irrespective of the trauma he went through, to kill Maroni and the others. The responsibility for that rests on him and him alone, and it’s wrong to lie to the public to preserve the moral character of a person who no longer can boast that character, especially as pinning it on Batman will make it harder to fight crime, as he will also be fighting public perception that he’s a murderer, and now the police as well, who will be hunting him. In addition, my perception of Batman has always been that his highest priority was (in the short term) fighting crime, and (in the long term) creating an urban mythology to frighten criminals, perhaps in a way that might survive his death. Making such a ridiculous decision as this one, just to preserve Harvey Dent as its one “shining light” smacks more of politics than anything else. I also don’t buy Batman’s insistence that he can’t be Gotham’s “shining light”, simply because he dresses in black and casts a foreboding dark image. It is Batman’s actions upon which he should be judged, and while this somewhat tragic denouement creates a nice opportunity for Gordon to explain to his son why Batman is a “Dark Knight”, it’s ultimately unnecessary, and even unbelievable internally: Batman suddenly changed his m.o. and started killing people? And then, just as suddenly, he decided to stop doing so when he chose not to kill the Joker? Sorry, but it’s not believable for the populace or police force to believe this, and this part of the film could’ve been dropped. Nonetheless, it’s a comparatively minor point, and since Goyer and the two Nolans have established their bona fides as the best comic book adapters in the film industry, I’m willing to cut them some slack, and speculate that they might just justify this decision by the virtue of the story of the next film.
I’ll be waiting.
---NITS & NOTES
I really liked the design of the Joker’s face, but I was a bit confused/disappointed by the fact that it looked like it was makeup internally. When his clown goons were talking in the beginning of the film, one of them said that he “heard” it was all makeup. My understanding was that this was intended to be a suggestion by the film that it was not, as a way to foreshadow the revelation that that was actually his face. But if it wasn’t intended as makeup, then why were the creases on his forehead, and that patch in the upper left corner of his forehead still colored like human Caucasian flesh? Why did the effect stop at the neck, and not extend over the rest of his body (his bare arms are even seen in one scene in which he’s sticking half his body out of a moving car’s window)?
Is it really a good idea for Bruce Wayne to be seen in the papers on a boat with a bunch of witnesses who see him suddenly leave abruptly by jumping into the water with a big bag, and swimming to a sea plane, especially when they know that word might get out that Batman was seen in China? Even if the Chinese government suppresses the news of Lau's kidnapping, it’s not a good idea. Lau's "extradition" eventually must be made public, and at the very least, couldn’t they have had Bruce’s equipment already on the plane, instead of taking an ominously black bag with him?
This could’ve been mentioned under notes for the first film, but I didn’t know until watching this one that Gordon’s ill-fated superior is named Commissioner Loeb. Jeph Loeb is a writer/producer who, in addition to his work on Smallville, Lost and Heroes (which he co-created), has written a bunch of comic books, including a number of Batman stories. One of them, a 13-issue miniseries called Batman: The Long Halloween, was one of the three Batman stories that inspired the story of Batman Begins. Portions of these three stories, in fact, are included as part of a mini comic booklet that is included with the Batman Begins Deluxe Edition DVD.
I didn’t buy the idea of Gordon not telling his wife about the ruse involving his death. He said he was afraid for her, but how does not telling her about it protect her? How would telling her alert the Joker? Even if the Joker or one of his inside cops were monitoring him, she could easily have acted the part of the widow.
If the Joker went to the hospital with the intention of having Harvey kill him, why did he wire it up to explode? Even within the context of his psychopathy, this made no sense, as he didn’t yet know about Harvey’s use of the flip of a coin to determine by chance whether he’d kill the Joker or let him go.
Okay, I missed the exposition of the Joker’s scheme at the end involving the two ferries filled with civilians and prison guards/convicts, perhaps because I was jotting down notes, but what exactly was the setup? There were bombs on each, right? And each ferry had the detonator for the other boat, right? But what was the incentive to blow up the other ferry? I think I gathered the basic thrust of the scheme, but was it that there was a time limit, after which both ferries exploded, and the explosion of one would prevent the other? Did I get it right? If so, why didn’t the ferries explode after the time limit came, and both sets of occupants refused to kill the other? Was it all just a ruse by the Joker, who intended to reveal after the ferries exploded that they weren’t really going to explode by the time limit? (Let me know if I got it.) Also, what were all those cons and guards doing on one of those boats? Was it a prison transfer, or something? Are ferries typically used for this? And wouldn’t the cons be cuffed during such a transport?
While watching Hellboy 2: The Golden Army, I predicted the manner in which the villain Nuada, the villain would be defeated. Near the end of this film, as the hostage situation was unfolding, I tried to imagine what I’d do if I were as crazy as the Joker, and just as a playful thought, I thought to myself that I’d dress up the hostages, tape or glue unloaded guns to their hands (similar to what Bryan Bryan did at the end of the film FX), and clown masks to their gagged faces, or stand outside the line of sight of the police snipers, holding them at gunpoint, lest they try to alert the cops. Then I thought, “Nah, I’m letting my imagination run away with me.” Then, lo and behold, I saw that hey, I’m two for two today!
LN: Harvey made his choice... It is Batman’s actions upon which he should be judged... Batman suddenly changed his m.o. and started killing people? And then, just as suddenly, he decided to stop doing so when he chose not to kill the Joker?
Thank you Luigi! This of course didn't ruin the movie for me but it definately stands out in the negative. Hopefully the next one will be so good that I forget about that
LN: Okay, I missed the exposition of the Joker’s scheme at the end involving the two ferries filled with civilians and prison guards/convicts[...]but what exactly was the setup?
Sounds like you figured it out pretty well. There was a time limit but the bombs obviously weren't on the timer, likely due to the Joker expecting one to blow up the other. When the Joker saw that neither fell for his scheme he pulled out his own detonator as Batman showed up. No, ferries are not typically used for prisoner transfer, doubtfully ever were. I believe they were there due to an evacuation, but I don't recall why, perhaps from the jail where the guy had the exploding cell phone.
Thanks, night.
inblackestnight: Harvey Dent gets deformed and the Joker, the man who tried to kill him and succeeded with Rachael, convinces him to go on a vendetta somehow. Sure he's mad that he lost Rachael but is that enough to kill an innocent child?
Luigi Novi: No, but Harvey is no longer sane. I don’t know if this was properly conveyed in the film, but in the comics, Two-Face is as nuts as the Joker.
inblackestnight: That made as much sense as Batman letting the Joker live
Luigi Novi: Batman does not kill. He might not go out of his way to save someone about to die, aS with Raas al Ghul/Henri Ducard in the prior film, but he doesn’t outright kill them.
inblackestnight: Does anybody know where this movie was filmed, the Gotham parts anyway?
Luigi Novi: According to Wikipedia, the first film was indeed shot primarily in Chicago and London, and this film was shot primarily in Chicago, with some UK and Hong Kong shooting. For future reference, check Wikipedia.
Terik: I didn't want Joker or the others to die in the other movies. They are all supposed to be thorns in the side of Batman. Like Luther to Superman.
Luigi Novi: True, but remember that movies tend to be more self-contained than the comics. Whereas the comics cannot easily kill off a major member of a rogues gallery because they’re a part of decades-long ongoing continuity, superhero movie franchises seem to go one for about three or four movies, so the hero’s interaction with one particular villain isn’t usually going to extend beyond one film (with some exceptions). I also think that this is especially true of psycho-murderer types, whose crimes often demand that they be killed by the end.
In the comics, Harvey's madness is made a little more easier to swallow by having him already been inflicted with an abusive father, terrible childhood memories, and schizophrenia.
Do you mean Multiple Personality Disorder?
Luigi Novi: No, but Harvey is no longer sane. I don’t know if this was properly conveyed in the film...
I would say it wasn't conveyed at all because he seemed quite sane, in a clinical sense, just pissed off.
LN: Batman does not kill. He might not go out of his way to save someone about to die...
Ok, then why save the Joker? He wouldn't have killed him, the abrupt landing would have
Does anyone else think that it was a really bad idea for the crews of both boats to bring the detonators down into the crowds? What if one group had rioted? Would it not have been easier to just keep the detonators away from the mobs and not give them a chance to forcefully take it? I was especially surprised that the police took it down among the convicts.
quote:Luigi Novi: I really liked the design of the Joker’s face, but I was a bit confused/disappointed by the fact that it looked like it was makeup internally. When his clown goons were talking in the beginning of the film, one of them said that he “heard” it was all makeup. My understanding was that this was intended to be a suggestion by the film that it was not, as a way to foreshadow the revelation that that was actually his face. But if it wasn’t intended as makeup, then why were the creases on his forehead, and that patch in the upper left corner of his forehead still colored like human Caucasian flesh? Why did the effect stop at the neck, and not extend over the rest of his body (his bare arms are even seen in one scene in which he’s sticking half his body out of a moving car’s window)?
quote:Luigi Novi: This could’ve been mentioned under notes for the first film, but I didn’t know until watching this one that Gordon’s ill-fated superior is named Commissioner Loeb. Jeph Loeb is a writer/producer who, in addition to his work on Smallville, Lost and Heroes (which he co-created), has written a bunch of comic books, including a number of Batman stories. One of them, a 13-issue miniseries called Batman: The Long Halloween, was one of the three Batman stories that inspired the story of Batman Begins. Portions of these three stories, in fact, are included as part of a mini comic booklet that is included with the Batman Begins Deluxe Edition DVD.
quote:Luigi Novi:
I didn’t buy the idea of Gordon not telling his wife about the ruse involving his death. He said he was afraid for her, but how does not telling her about it protect her? How would telling her alert the Joker? Even if the Joker or one of his inside cops were monitoring him, she could easily have acted the part of the widow.
quote:Luigi Novi: If the Joker went to the hospital with the intention of having Harvey kill him, why did he wire it up to explode? Even within the context of his psychopathy, this made no sense, as he didn’t yet know about Harvey’s use of the flip of a coin to determine by chance whether he’d kill the Joker or let him go.
quote:Luigi Novi: Also, what were all those cons and guards doing on one of those boats? Was it a prison transfer, or something? Are ferries typically used for this? And wouldn’t the cons be cuffed during such a transport?
quote:inblacketnight: Luigi Novi: No, but Harvey is no longer sane. I don’t know if this was properly conveyed in the film...
I would say it wasn't conveyed at all because he seemed quite sane, in a clinical sense, just pissed off.
quote:inblackestnight:
LN: Batman does not kill. He might not go out of his way to save someone about to die...
Ok, then why save the Joker? He wouldn't have killed him, the abrupt landing would have
No I don't think Harvey was in his right mind, and he used that coin long before he was injured, but post-traumatic stress, or whatever you want to call it, doesn't equal insane. Everything he did was total volition and he knew the consequences.
It was not Batman's intent for the Joker to fall off the building; he was just trying to get the detonator away from him. I agree that Batman does not kill, and the Joker falling over was mostly accidental, but does that mean he has to save him since he put him there? All I was getting at is why kill off Two-Face when he's just been introduced, and why let the Joker live when Heath Ledger cannot continue his fantastic rendition?
Yes, multiple personality, sorry I got lazy when typing.
I was under the impression that Ledger had filmed all his scenes and thus the Joker was meant to be alive before Ledger died. To "kill" the Joker in the film would mean to do a little bit of film trickery, which I am uncomfortable with myself.
I forgot about ''Year One'', thanks. I think that predates Jeph's comic book career by about a decade, so maybe the character's name is just coincidence (unless Frank Miller, who wrote Year One, and eventually began doing screenwriting himself, was acquainted with Jeph, and named the character after him).
Most people I've seen at funerals tend to be stoic, including the immediate loved ones of the deceased, and tend to be more emotive only in private. She would not have had to do more than that to complete the disguise. Merely looking somber would've been enough.
I meant just cuffed, not to the boat. If they were cuffed, I must've missed it.
I think one of the points Batman tried to make to the Joker is that we are all not just as crazy as he is (which is why I wonder if the story was inspired in part by The Killing Joke). That's why he didn't ram the batpod into him when he had the chance, and let him fall at the end. He needed to not just beat the Joker, but answer his challenge by proving him wrong when the Joker said that everyone is potentially just as crazy and murderous as him.
Question: I was just reminded of a sequence in the film when Alfred burns a letter. This caused me to have an idea, but I can't remember the details of the sequence, and I think I need them to make the point. Who was the letter from, and what did it say, more or less? Was it from Rachel? Did Alfred burn it without letting Bruce know about it?
Yes, it was from Rachel.
If I remember correctly, it was a "Dear John letter" saying that she loved Harvey & planned to marry him.
Bruce never saw the letter.
Thanks. What now occurs to me, but which didn't when I first compiled my thoughts about the film, was something about Klaus Janson. Klaus, who inked over Frank Miller's pencils on Daredevil and The Dark Knight Returns, was one of my sequential storytelling instructors in art school. I remember how the question came up in class of whether he had any interest in writing, and he responded that he did some writing, but it was very personal, and only for himself. Then, several years ago, I was pleased to read a story in the anthology miniseries Batman: Black and White that he both wrote and illustrated. As Batman dealt with some bad guys terrorizing a school bus, Alfred was at the mansion, and found an old letter from Bruce's parents. By the end of the story, he decided to burn it. It seems eerily similar to that plot point in the film, and I wonder if Goyer and the two Nolans took that plot point from Klaus' story.
All I was getting at is why kill off Two-Face when he's just been introduced, and why let the Joker live when Heath Ledger cannot continue his fantastic rendition?
Ledger died after they'd finished filming and doing post-production on his role. I don't think they had time after his death to reshoot the scenes with Two-Face to allow him to return in future films. IIRC they originally planned to have Dent's transformation into Two-Face as part of a third film so they were thinking of the idea at one point. Anyhow, they always could bring the Joker back as a character, it just wouldn't be Heath Ledger's Joker.
Now, one nit that I noticed and I wasn't even looking for them while watching:
After the Joker chucks Rachel out the window, Batman goes after her and falls all the way down to street level. Suddenly they cut to the next day. Did Batman really leave the psychopathic killer in a room with a bunch of innocent people or was his going back up and chasing the Joker off just too boring to show the audience? In his absence it shouldn't have taken the Joker too long to find the broom closet Bruce shoved Dent into, or at least kill a few partygoers.
NANJAO: Given that Fox based his resignation on the presence of the Big Brother Machine, did the fact that it went boom at the end change his mind about resigning or will Bruce have to go somewhere else to get new toys (and find a CEO for his company)?
NANJAO: Kudos to the writers for remembering that they burned down Wayne Manor last time and that they wouldn't have time to rebuild it between movies. Little things like this make my inner nitpicker very happy.
inblackestnight: All I was getting at is why kill off Two-Face when he's just been introduced, and why let the Joker live when Heath Ledger cannot continue his fantastic rendition?
Luigi Novi: Well, for one thing, as good as Ledger's performance was, there's no law stating that he has to be the only one to play him. Should the Joker never appear onscreen again simply because Ledger is no longer with us? Ledger was a true artist, and although I never knew the guy, if I had to guess, I would guess that he'd want other artists to take on the role.
As for killing off Two-Face, the first priority a storyteller has to his/her audience is to tell a good story. There's no obligation to arbitrarily extend a character's life, simply to prolong a series of films set in a franchise. That may be a greater concern for the comics, which cannot easily kill off an iconic character that's been around for several decades, and even in comics, they've been trying to deal with such problems in any number of ways, such as alternate universes, or killing off characters just to bring them back later--the latter of which has been detrimental to suspension of disbelief, IMO. But in movies, a given story and a given character can be more self-contained. Two-Face's character arc in this movie served the purpose of the narrative, which tied directly into the Joker's challenge that given the right circumstances, anyone can become a mass murderer, and into Batman's character arc as a Dark Knight who ponders whether he can be a "shining light" hero to Gotham, and not just a dark vigilante (even though I personally disagree with his ultimate decision). Goyer and the two Nolans did an excellent job with Ras al Ghul in the first film, and with Joker and Two-Face in this one; Who's to say they won't do a similar job with the next villain in the next film? Maybe Hush? Or the Riddler? Why not give another villain the ability to breathe in the next film, instead of bringing back the same old villain? Then again, since the Joker survives at the end of this film, maybe he will play a role in future films, albeit by a different actor.
RE: Wayne Manor: Well, Goyer and the two Nolans are good writers. I doubt they'd forget that they did that!
Then again, it's three years later. How long would it take to rebuild the mansion?
quote:Luigi Novi: Then again, it's three years later. How long would it take to rebuild the mansion?
Oh, I must've missed that. I could've sworn I heard a reference to three years passing within the story in some publicity piece. Maybe I remembered it or understood it wrong.
Commenting on the very top of the page; Robin Williams would have been a terrible choice for THIS Joker. We would have gotten a Jim Carey Mark 2 version of the Riddler instead. Ledger owns this part.
Me; "I like the tv series cycle a hundred times better than this globby thing. Looks like they were trying to replicate the chunkiness of the tumbler here, but it's nothing special to me."
Hey! I'm psychic! Now I know why the Pod has Tumbler similarities. However, I'll amend my statement by saying that the Pod is cool, and IS something special to me!
Luigi;
"...that came out of that awful 60’s TV show..."
GAASSPP!!!! Sacrilege!!!!! 
The '60's series has it's place, and sure, 40 years later we've moved on, but it will always hold a place in my heart and childhood. Heck, I pretty well give it credit for my interest in superheroes, which led to reading comnic books, which led to reading novels... And really, if you were to introduce a kid under 10 to Batman, that would be the place to do it, as far as I'm concerned. Not the 1989 Batman, or Batman Begins, or this movie, which are just too dark and scary for a little mind. Adam West and Superfriends first, then in later years the harder, raw stuff.
Luigi; "I really liked the design of the Joker’s face, but I was a bit confused/disappointed by the fact that it looked like it was makeup internally."
So was I. It's a new take on his origin, that's for sure. Got a question though; since it is make-up, why wasn't he forced to clean his face in Police Headquarters? Would a real-life police station allow a dangerous criminal to remain disguised as a mime or lizard man? All he'd have to do is wash it off and try to leave as a regular person. (Except for those nasty mouth scars)
An awesome movie, though, and a city that you couldn't PAY me to move to! It's simply too dangerous what with all those explosions and buildings blowing up. The Joker is officially, to me, the Most Dangerous Super Villain Ever, taking over for General Zod and his friends, who wreacked havoc, but needed superpowers to do it.
The Joker can't be hurt, because he doesn't care, and that makes him even harder to defeat.
Batman on the run from the police? Has somebody been reading Stan Lee's Spider-Man comics from the '60's and '70's? New ground for the Caped Crusader I guess.
It keeps Commissioner Gordon's job safe for a while (he'd be out of work if he was seen with the supposed bat killer). Now that the signal is destroyed, maybe this will result in the creation of the Bat Cell Phone?
quote:Steve: And really, if you were to introduce a kid under 10 to Batman, that would be the place to do it, as far as I'm concerned. Not the 1989 Batman, or Batman Begins, or this movie, which are just too dark and scary for a little mind. Adam West and Superfriends first, then in later years the harder, raw stuff.
quote:Steve: Batman on the run from the police? Has somebody been reading Stan Lee's Spider-Man comics from the '60's and '70's? New ground for the Caped Crusader I guess.
Well, I thought that Batman Begins was better... anyway, onto the nits.
-----
Did Bruce drive the Tumbler into Wayne Towers so that Fox could somehow design a bike to come out of it if the Tumbler was damaged beyond repair? I bet that was subtle.
Doing the Bike out of the car shift reminded me of the Joker's line in an earlier Batman movie, "where does he get all those wonderful toys?" To me it undid some of the ideas about where Batman got his gear, that being unused gadgets from the R&D and that Batman somehow magically got new toys.
----
Why wasn't the mansion being repaired? Oh, that's right, it was Sunday.
I would think that the construction workers would notice a black limo drive up, a butler walk out and into a storage crate, and then not leave for a fair amount of time. I mean, the workers must be suspicious. Same thing when Bruce zooms out on the red motorcyle.
-----
Meet the Joker's new chiropractor... Batman!
The Joker seems to be cracking his back a lot after fighting with Batman, you can hear the pops and stuff. Batman must do good work if ramming someone's head and the like into the table doesn't cause physical damage to the Joker.
Gotham's school district includes a bank?
When they drive the school bus out of the bank, it's meant to look like it's blending in with the other school buses. Unfortunately, this whole scene bothered me because it would be unlikely that 1, there would be a gap large enough for a bus to drive merge in at just the right time; and 2, that the bus drivers wouldn't notice a school bus literally driving out of a bank. The only way to explain it is that the whole convoy of buses are driven by the Joker's men.
The League of Shadows apparently didn't test the drugs they were planning on using to destroy Gotham...
In Batman begins, the water is vaporized all the way to Wayne towers. People along the monorail's path would have gone crazy. However, everyone is fine. One person in particular shouldn't have been fine and that's the Police Comissioner. He was in the path of the "spiked" water vapor and should have been coo coo from the last movie. Also, the scarecrow didn't seem so crazy to me.
-----
NANJAO
I know Batman doesn't like to kill, but why does he have issues with beating the cr@p out of someone who can't fight back? I refer to when Gordon removes the Joker's cuffs and then leaves during the interrogation.
Nit
Also, why after Gordon and Batman leave to go rescue the two people do they leave the Joker uncuffed? If they had bothered to cuff him again, or have that guy who was guarding the door do it. The Joker wouldn't have been able to escape. Speaking of which, did the guard try to teach the Joker some manners and fail at it?
Nit
I would think that before locking up the "fat" guy who was hearing voices, they would at least search the guy. They seemed shocked to find the scar, and the cell phone. While I could possibly see them not physically looking at the guy's skin before locking him up, I'd think that a pat down would reveal the phone. It was afterall, clearly protruding right beneath the skin.
Nit
Catching the Joker with the tether at the end would have at least broken the Joker's leg. More likely though it would have detached his leg/foot from the rest of him and the Joker would have gone the way that other movie's Joker went... Splat.
Slipped in at the 1-hour mark to see this again and thought I'd make a few more comments;
The Joker's face is make-up. From his neck down he's Caucasian, and of course, as mentioned, the white stuff peels across his forehead at times.
The prisoners were handcuffed, but most weren't shown as such. Their hands were cuffed together and linked to foot cuffs.
Interesting that not one person mentions that if they blow up the prisoner ferry, they'll also kill police men and prison guards. Maybe that's why the civilian guy decided not to trigger it.
The scary big, black prisoner who convinces the prison guard to let him have the detonator is Tony 'Tiny' Lister. He was a WWF wrestler called 'Zeus' at the time that Hulk Hogan's movie, 'No Holds Barred' was out, of which he was a co-star. My second viewing made me think of him as Daredevil's movie arch-enemy, the Kingpin.
This is the first time in any Batman movie that we ever see Batman's eye holes as they're drawn in the comics, namely blank, like Spider-Man, and I have to say I really like the effect.
Lucius Fox tells Batman that the cell-phone link-up is too much power for one person, and as long as it exists he won't remain with the company. Batman tells him to key in his name to self-destruct it, so, no, Lucius Fox hasn't quit Wayne Industries, which means Morgan Freeman will probably be back for a third movie.
After all, we seem to need him for the new Batmobile (a Lamborghini-inspired car, perhaps?), or the Tumbler Mark II. I wasn't a fan of the Tumbler in Batman Begins (I even saw it in person on display), but I gotta admit that I was sorry to see it blown away.
About a minute or less into the end credits there's a notice, 'Dedicated to our friends Heath Ledger and (stunt man who died in a stunt)'. Nice to see that, but haunting when viewed with that ethereal bit of music that's playing on the soundtrack.
Gordon has a son and a daughter. Barbara Gordon was his daughter in the comics, but I don't think he ever had a son. In the movie, I think he called his wife 'Barbara'.
I didn't know a stuntman died in the filming. Do you know what the stunt was?
About it being make up or what not, it is definitely make up because when he's dressed as a cop, he's not wearing any.
Also, Rachel looks different... she looks like she's got jowls a little bit. Must be the stress of the job.
Polls, Batman beat up the Joker in the interrogation room because they needed info from him.
He could've been wearing makeup when disguised as the cop, just as Jack Nicholson's Joker did at the museum with Vicki Vale.
Special effects technician Conway Wickliffe was killed during a car accident while preparing one of the film's stunts. (Source)
Bruce says he wants a mask that can turn its head and mentions that it'd be easier to back up while driving. However, there are no mirrors on the Tumbler and no windows in the back thus, it wouldn't matter if Batman could see what's behind while driving.
Yeah, I thought of that, in the back of my mind, but I didn't consciously write it down in my notes. Good call, Polls.
Harvey "Baby Talk" Dent didn't sound scary enough so they changed it to "Two Face"
After the accident, it should be quite difficult to for Harvey to speak normally with a hole in the side of mouth. I don't doubt that with time he'd eventually be able to, but not within the time frame shown in the movie.
How did Batman get onto the outside of the building he was standing on when preparing to jump onto Lao's building? Did he take the elevator like Spiderman did in (the movie)Spiderman 2?
Re: Dent's face
With that hole in his jaw, shouldn't there be saliva oozing out as well?
Two Face: "Whoa, wait a second Batman, got something in my eye..."
...and that eye is just asking to get dirt in it...
He probably flew onto it.
Bruce says he wants a mask that can turn its head and mentions that it'd be easier to back up while driving. However, there are no mirrors on the Tumbler and no windows in the back thus, it wouldn't matter if Batman could see what's behind while driving.
He doesn't actually want it for backing up & wasn't the line "make backing out of the driveway easier." He wants it because he almost got killed in that business with the van. The backing up was a smart alec answer to Fox.
Unless his condition improves, don't expect Morgan Freeman to be in the next movie.
He was in a terrible car accident recently.
By John A. Lang (Johnalang) on Tuesday, August 05, 2008 - 7:50 pm:
Unless his condition improves, don't expect Morgan Freeman to be in the next movie.
He was in a terrible car accident recently.
It's gotta be related to the Joker. Or maybe that one guy who thought he could blackmail batman did it.
Unless his condition improves....
Well, bones do heal, after all.
Unless his condition improves....
Well, bones do heal, after all.
D@mn it Jim, I'm a R&D Developer/CEO/Batman Toy Manufacturer, not a Doctor!
Polls, Batman beat up the Joker in the interrogation room because they needed info from him. - Luigi
IMO, the best scene of the movie. Batman comes to the realization that he truly cannot beat the Joker, regardless of how far he could go. The Bat simply doesn't work against the Joker. Joker only gives up information because he wants to, and there isn't a thing Batman can do about it.
I also liked the "Bat-imposters". This was a great fresh take on Batman's effect on the public.
The one thing I disagreed with was Batman and Gordon’s decision at the very end of the film to implicate Batman for Two-Face’s five murders in order to preserve Harvey Dent’s image as Gotham’s “one true hero”. - Luigi
This comment was posted several times, and perhaps I can clarify why this was a good decision. By this point Bruce had come to the understanding that no matter what he did as Batman, it would take people working within the law to keep Gotham safe. Batman will not take a life, so the criminals that he exposes and thwarts need to face justice. The one thing Batman cannot do is operate within the justice system- the criminals have the right to face their accusers and Batman would have to reveal himself to the Courts, which would bring an end to the symbol that Bruce had created.
Bruce always considered Gordon and Dent to be the real heroes. He understood that Dent's good name was needed to keep the mob bosses in prison. The revelation of Dent's psychosis would have undone all their work to keep the mob locked up.
Batman is a necessary evil, someone who is willing to go where no sane men would tread due to the severe risk. This was demonstrated three times in this movie- by Batman's loss of Rachel, by Gordon's staged death and by the Joker and Dent taking Gordon's family hostage. Batman alone lacks power, only with the police can he truly make a difference. It'll be interesting to see how this in played out in the third movie.
FREAKY early Joker concept art!
Me - "Batman on the run from the police? Has somebody been reading Stan Lee's Spider-Man comics from the '60's and '70's? New ground for the Caped Crusader I guess."
Man, has my memory been filled with other stuff; I totally forgot the incredible Batmobile/Tumbler chase scene where Batman was on the run from the Police (to get Rachel back to Wayne Manor for the cure to Scarecrow's fear gas).
Not so much 'new ground', after all!
I watched 'Batman Begins' this past weekend again, and noticed that Bale didn't have such a gravelly voice in all of his scenes. Sometimes it was husky and disguised, others it was almost too gravelly, but definitely better than the voice used in this movie.
4 weeks & this is still the #1 movie
It's very rare that a movie stays at #1 for this long.
well, if the Mummy3 didn't bomb, maybe it wouldn't have...
I saw this movie again today, not only because it was so good, but because I wanted to go in with a different frame of mind as to how the Acts were structured, in order to experience the film and its length with a different perception, in order to reevaluate my feelings about its length from the first time I saw it. Got some other nits:
When the two clowns on the bank's roof are cutting off the wiring that handles the bank's alarm, the one in charge of actually doing so says that the alarm was going out to a private number instead of the cops. Why is this? Is Batman the private number? Did it lead to Wayne Enterprises? How was this arranged? Couldn't this compromise Batman's identity? And why would it go to Wayne/Batman instead of the cops? Shouldn't it go to both?
Nestor Carbonell looked like he had WAY too much eyeliner in a couple of his scenes, such as the scene immediately following the courtroom indictment of all the mobsters following Lau's "extradition".
One of the flaws I've observed in the Batman mythos is the length of Batman's "unofficial" relationship the cops. It's one thing to capture criminals, which is merely just an application of making a citizen's arrest. But when Batman asks Gordon for ten minutes alone with the crime scene before his men "contaminate", this opens up a big ol' can of worms. He actually cuts out a section of wall with a fingerprint on it. I know Gordon and Batman have to deal with corrupt Gotham cops, but wouldn't any evidence he found be inadmissable if any of the criminals caught were brought to court? Wouldn't the defense attorneys argue that by having an unknown vigilante access to a crime scene, that he contaminated it, and that their clients have no way to confront their accusers because they have no idea about that evidence's reliability?
Wouldn't the ruse of Gordon's assasination have hinged upon knowing exactly when and how he would've been shot, and from where? How could they know this? For that matter, how could they know that he wouldn't actually be shot?
After the Joker is arrested, Gordon mentions that there was no match for his fingerprints or DNA. Doesn't DNA fingerprinting take weeks?
Joker told Batman where Rachel and Dent each were tied up. Presumably, Batman chose Rachel, but he showed up at Dent's location. Did Batman actually choose Dent over Rachel? Or did the Joker lie? I find the former unlikely, but I don't recall (offhand) if Batman expressed surprise when he showed up and saw that it was Dent that was there and not Rachel, and over at Roger Ebert's Answer Man column, Ebert suggested that Joker did this in order to drive home the notion of futility to Batman. Still, I would've liked it if this was made clear in the film, because I don't recall it being addressed.
Alfred is right that a Lamborghini is not very subtle. Shouldn't Bruce have taken a more nondescript car? Doesn't he keep one or two lying around when he needs to move around discreetly?
Regarding my earlier problems with Batman and Gordon's decision to pin the murders of the informants on Batman, I thought of another problem: Gordon's two kids may eventually talk in a few years to the press. They may not be very sanguine about covering for the nutjob who traumatized them by holding them and their parents at gunpoint and threatening to murder them.
When the two clowns on the bank's roof are cutting off the wiring that handles the bank's alarm, the one in charge of actually doing so says that the alarm was going out to a private number instead of the cops. Why is this? Is Batman the private number? Did it lead to Wayne Enterprises? How was this arranged? Couldn't this compromise Batman's identity? And why would it go to Wayne/Batman instead of the cops? Shouldn't it go to both?
The bank was controlled by the mob, perhaps it went out to some of their enforcers. The bank manager (William Fichtner) did tell them that they had no idea who they were messing with when he went all shot-gun crazy on them.
I saw this movie again today, not only because it was so good, but because I wanted to go in with a different frame of mind as to how the Acts were structured, in order to experience the film and its length with a different perception, in order to reevaluate my feelings about its length from the first time I saw it.
And what was the outcome btw? You never mentioned it...
I was able to better appreciate it. All the twists and turns and reversals of fortune made it easy to misperceive where the beginning and end of each Act was initially, but now, I can see that second Act begins around the time when Bruce is in his penthouse, with his mask and cape off, lamenting that he may have failed when after the Joker has been terrorizing the city (I think this occurs after Gordon is "shot"), and the third Act begins after Rachel is killed and Harvey is disfigured.
As for the bank's silent alarm dialing a private number, I assumed that it was to whatever mobster was in charge of the bank, or even the bank manager with the shotgun handy. They were operating a massive money laundering scheme so it makes sense that they wouldn't want the cops poking around.
So who was the bank employee with the large gun that doesn't seem to be afraid? was he good or was he part of the mob?
I'd say he was part of the mob.
quote:Luigi Novi: Joker told Batman where Rachel and Dent each were tied up. Presumably, Batman chose Rachel, but he showed up at Dent's location. Did Batman actually choose Dent over Rachel? Or did the Joker lie? I find the former unlikely, but I don't recall (offhand) if Batman expressed surprise when he showed up and saw that it was Dent that was there and not Rachel, and over at Roger Ebert's Answer Man column, Ebert suggested that Joker did this in order to drive home the notion of futility to Batman. Still, I would've liked it if this was made clear in the film, because I don't recall it being addressed.
quote:Luigi Novi:
Alfred is right that a Lamborghini is not very subtle. Shouldn't Bruce have taken a more nondescript car? Doesn't he keep one or two lying around when he needs to move around discreetly?
quote:Luigi Novi: Regarding my earlier problems with Batman and Gordon's decision to pin the murders of the informants on Batman, I thought of another problem: Gordon's two kids may eventually talk in a few years to the press. They may not be very sanguine about covering for the nutjob who traumatized them by holding them and their parents at gunpoint and threatening to murder them.
If it was necessary to question the family for some reason children are typically more truthful than adults. Even if they're told to lie their body language is easier to spot as well. Hopefully the press in the DC world has a bit more respect not only for the dead but also for memebers in law-enforcement than this one but it dependes how the next movie is written I suppose.
Why would Bruce Wayne need to move around discreetly, though?
Luigi Novi: Because having people notice him, or paparazzi stalking him, might make it harder for him to do what he intends to?
While that could be a problem, who it everyone likely to believe, the kids or the parents, especially if he convinces Barbara to lie?
Luigi Novi: If he convinces the kids to lie, then obviously, it's a moot point. My hypothesis was predicated on the idea that they might not be able to be convinced to do this, since they might resent the idea of covering for Dent. Who would they believe? They'd believe the kids, if what the kids said fit the available evidence, which it does, given the aforementioned discussion of these crimes not fitting Batman's M.O. It also would require Gordon to suppress or destroy the evidence that it was Dent who killed Maroni, such as the bullet wound found in Moroni's driver, which might be traced to Dent's gun.
The DVD is "said" to be set for a holiday release, though WB has not yet set a date.
(Note: The above link is the second page of a two-page story.)
I know Gordon and Batman have to deal with corrupt Gotham cops, but wouldn't any evidence he found be inadmissable if any of the criminals caught were brought to court?- Luigi
You are correct. The State could argue that the section of wall that had been cut was consistent in materials, paint and age to the rest of the wall, but there would be no way to verify that the fingerprint existed prior to the section being cut out.
Proper evidence collection begins with detailed photography of the undisturbed crime scene, then evidence collection with accompanying photographs to document what is being collected and how it is being collected. Batman could easily do this with his own equipment under the observation of Gordon, then turn the photos and evidence over to the police.
Doesn't DNA fingerprinting take weeks?- Luigi
You are correct again. In many cases DNA testing can take several months. Even if the DNA were being matched against a small database, ie. a database comprised solely of DNA samples from criminals arrested by the Gotham PD it would still take at least a full day to process the sample and run it through the database.
Did Batman actually choose Dent over Rachel? Or did the Joker lie? I find the former unlikely, but I don't recall (offhand) if Batman expressed surprise when he showed up and saw that it was Dent that was there and not Rachel, and over at Roger Ebert's Answer Man column, Ebert suggested that Joker did this in order to drive home the notion of futility to Batman.- Luigi
I agree with Josh M that Joker deliberately switched the addresses, but I think it was a test. Whose life would a cold vigilante save, an innocent woman or the man who holds the key to locking up all the criminals that the vigilante worked so hard to capture? Batman's decision provided powerful information to Joker- Batman chose the innocent life, which means that he can be hurt emotionally.
While that could be a problem, who it everyone likely to believe, the kids or the parents, especially if he convinces Barbara to lie?
Luigi Novi: If he convinces the kids to lie, then obviously, it's a moot point. My hypothesis was predicated on the idea that they might not be able to be convinced to do this, since they might resent the idea of covering for Dent. Who would they believe? They'd believe the kids, if what the kids said fit the available evidence, which it does, given the aforementioned discussion of these crimes not fitting Batman's M.O. It also would require Gordon to suppress or destroy the evidence that it was Dent who killed Maroni, such as the bullet wound found in Moroni's driver, which might be traced to Dent's gun.- Luigi
Gordon's son appeared to be about ten years old in this movie, so figure it'll be ten to 15 years or so before he's old enough for anyone to seriously listen to his claims. They're doing this to make sure that the convictions against the jailed mob bosses stick. By the time the boy is old enough to spill the beans, the matter of the crime bosses will be long over and they'll have been in prison for ten years.
I don't recall them saying anything about their doing this having to do with the mob bosses, and I saw the film twice. The convictions of the mobsters was to be assured by Lau, and Lau was dead by the end of the film. Batman's plan was to preserve Harvey's memory as the "shining light hero" of Gotham.
GREAT LINE: I'm like a dog chasing a car, because I'm not sure what I'm going to do with it when I catch it.---Joker
The film will be re-released for IMAX in January for an Oscar push.
And, it comes out on DVD December 9, in single and two-disc editions. More here. The two-disc edition is the better value. For a few dollars more, it has a lot of extras; the single disc is a skimpy bare-bones release.
The Batman wannabes are idiots. Don't they realize that there's a chance of them getting KILLED while chasing bad guys?
That's not heroism, that's stupidity.
However, fireman & policemen are the exception.
Although I touched upon the dubiousness of Batman and Gordon's idea of blaming Dent's murders on Batman, MAD magazine, in their parody of the film in issue #495 (November 2008) offered a view of it that I hadn't thought of:
Battyman: "The public must never learn of what Harvey did! There's only one way to cover this up. Me! Blame his police killings on me!"
Gordon: "But wouldn't it be even easier to blame the murders on Jokester?"
Battyman: "Maybe! But this is the best plan I can suggest right now! I just hope my thinking hasn't been too affected by the fact that I just fell four stories and probably have a grade-2 concussion!"
I guess Batman thought that choosing to accept false blame for himself was morally acceptable, but not framing someone else for them, even if the someone else was the Joker.
By inblackestnight on Saturday, July 19, 2008 - 2:09 pm:
I wouldn't think a standard RPG would do so much damage to the batmobile.
RPG's have a shaped charge war-head designed specifically to penatrate light armour. The Tumblers armour may be thick enough to handle small-arms fire, but its not going to be thick enough to handle a direct hit by an RPG.
By Terik on Saturday, July 19, 2008 - 4:52 pm:
I was also confused by the blame game. It's not as if there are only two people to blame: Two-Face or Batman. Could also blame an imposter Batman wantabe.
If the blame was laid on the Joker, then he'd have to be questioned about it, and more to the point a statement of everything he said pertaining to those crimes would be read out in a court of law.
If Bats is accused them the police can keep the cases open pending Batmans capture, which will allow Gorden to hide much of the evidence that indicates who really committed the crimes. (They can also claim that anything Joker says about Dent is a lie).
By Luigi_novi (Luigi_novi) on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 9:41 pm:
I didn’t buy the idea of Gordon not telling his wife about the ruse involving his death. He said he was afraid for her, but how does not telling her about it protect her? How would telling her alert the Joker? Even if the Joker or one of his inside cops were monitoring him, she could easily have acted the part of the widow.
Gorden knows, or must suspect, that someone on his team is passing information to the mod after they removed the trackable bank-notes before hiding all their money.
Remember we are talking about police detectives, who will have had to break the news of a loved one being killed before and as such would be quite able to spot if Mrs Gordans reactions were not genuine. It should also be remembered that it isn't just Gordens wife who needs to show genuine grief - his kids have to be able to be seem to be affected by the loss as well.
Unless Gordens entire family consists of Oscar-class actors at least one of them is not going to be seen as reacting in a genuine manner...and in front of someone who would find it easy to notice.
By Josh M on Wednesday, July 23, 2008 - 10:53 pm:
quote:
Luigi Novi: This could’ve been mentioned under notes for the first film, but I didn’t know until watching this one that Gordon’s ill-fated superior is named Commissioner Loeb. Jeph Loeb is a writer/producer who, in addition to his work on Smallville, Lost and Heroes (which he co-created), has written a bunch of comic books, including a number of Batman stories. One of them, a 13-issue miniseries called Batman: The Long Halloween, was one of the three Batman stories that inspired the story of Batman Begins. Portions of these three stories, in fact, are included as part of a mini comic booklet that is included with the Batman Begins Deluxe Edition DVD.
Does that also mean that the Commissioner Loeb present in "Batman: Year One" was also based on Jeph Loeb?
More than likely. Batman; The Long Halloween was based off Batman Year one. In fact the names of the Crime family in TLH (and as it turns out in both this film and the last) come from these books as well.
By steve McKinnon (Steve) on Saturday, August 02, 2008 - 7:31 pm:
Gordon has a son and a daughter. Barbara Gordon was his daughter in the comics, but I don't think he ever had a son. In the movie, I think he called his wife 'Barbara'.
I think this varies on which of the batman books you look at. In Year one and TLH Gorden has a son, Barbara Gordon being his Niece rather than his daughter. In cannon (and in TAS) Barbara Gorden is his daughter, and goes on to become Batgirl. Thankfully(?) given the rough age of this Barbara Gorden it would be another 4-5 years of movie time before that happens.
I'm guessing they concentrated more on his son as Hollywood scriptwriters as they seem to have a fixation on father/son relationships.
By Polls Voice (Polls_voice) on Sunday, August 03, 2008 - 6:52 pm:
How did Batman get onto the outside of the building he was standing on when preparing to jump onto Lao's building? Did he take the elevator like Spiderman did in (the movie)Spiderman 2?
There was a small walkway with a rail behind Bats in the wide shot, also visible is a door. As to how he got into the building he probably just used the front door.
By Obi-Juan on Friday, August 29, 2008 - 5:04 pm:
Doesn't DNA fingerprinting take weeks?- Luigi
You are correct again. In many cases DNA testing can take several months. Even if the DNA were being matched against a small database, ie. a database comprised solely of DNA samples from criminals arrested by the Gotham PD it would still take at least a full day to process the sample and run it through the database.
It depends on what you mean by testing. Full DNA testing that is admissable as evidence can take months as samples of the sample have to be sent off to other labs for cross-checking.
Testing in a lab to get a reading that the police could use, but which would get thrown out of court in 3 seconds flat, can be done in a few hours to a day...Assuming that the Lab tests that sample there and then, which isn't normally the case simply because of the backlog of samples to be tested from other crimes.
This 'get a DNA reading within the hour' is a staple of TV and films today. It crops up twice in Dark Knight - They also manage to get three DNA samples off the Playing card on the dead Batman within a single day.
Did Batman actually choose Dent over Rachel? Or did the Joker lie? I find the former unlikely, but I don't recall (offhand) if Batman expressed surprise when he showed up and saw that it was Dent that was there and not Rachel, and over at Roger Ebert's Answer Man column, Ebert suggested that Joker did this in order to drive home the notion of futility to Batman.- Luigi
I agree with Josh M that Joker deliberately switched the addresses, but I think it was a test. Whose life would a cold vigilante save, an innocent woman or the man who holds the key to locking up all the criminals that the vigilante worked so hard to capture? Batman's decision provided powerful information to Joker- Batman chose the innocent life, which means that he can be hurt emotionally.
Joker gave the wrong address. Batman clearly tells Gorden that he's going after Rachel as he leaves the interview room.
Nits; When Bats is lying on the ground, after not running the Joker down, one of Jokers goons attempts to remove his mask and gets shocked. If you look to the left edge of the screen a second joker-masked man is standing there, and backs off when the first gets shocked. However this masked man does not appear seconds later when Gorden puts his gun to the back of Jokers head, nor is there any indication that there anyone else standing there. This guy should have been perfectly visible to Gorden as he came up behind Joker, and appears to be armed...Yet there is nothing that shows Gorden worried about being attacked from that direction.
After Bats throws Joker around the interview room for a while, most of the white makeup on Jokers forehead is gone. In the next scene where we see Joker again the makeup has returned to the right side of his forehead.
Gorden keeps saying that 'five people are dead, two of them cops'.
This makes no sense. Joker killed at least 3 cops (two in Harveys room, one when he went after Dent in the van). Dent himself only killed one cop (the one who captured him). He let the other dirty cop go (or didn't kill her as he says something about living to do something for another day before hitting her).
When Joker is shooting at the van carrying Dent, Dent asks if the van was built for this kind of thing. The guard says that it would take a lot more than that (pistol and shot-gun) to do any damage. However there appears to be a large shotgun blast hole above his head that light is shining through as he says this. (If this is not just an effect of the lighting in the van then this is a double nit, since not only is the guard wrong but its the middle of the night).
FUNNY MOMENT:
The Joker driving the police car with his head sticking out of the car window.
It's funny because a he says, his "I'm a dog..." line to Dent later in the movie. Therefore, the Joker is acting like a dog by sticking his head out of the car window.
The Long Halloween is indeed inspired by, and is an extension of, Year One, according to Jeph Loeb in Mark Salisbury's 1999 book, Writers on Comics Scriptwriting. He got the idea from writer Mark Waid, who, when told Loeb was working on a story set in Year One, informed him that Harvey Dent's years prior to becoming Two-Face had not yet been depicted in depth since the original ''Year One'' story.
quote:Cyber: Gorden keeps saying that 'five people are dead, two of them cops'.
This makes no sense. Joker killed at least 3 cops (two in Harveys room, one when he went after Dent in the van). Dent himself only killed one cop (the one who captured him). He let the other dirty cop go (or didn't kill her as he says something about living to do something for another day before hitting her).
Couple of things. Most people have said everything I've noticed except....
1. Reed. Now that Batman is PNG'ed, he can still expose Bruce.
2. Continuity error. When they raid the mob banks, you see people with vests/windbreakers that read "GCPD". Yet, later, the SWAT van only reads "GPD".
3. I loved the scene with the prisoner on the boat, with "what you should have done 10 minutes ago", throwing away the detonator.
4. The scene with the Joker at the hospital when it doesn't all blow up is about the only "Nicholsonian" moment for the Joker.
Oops. #1 should be "Reese", not "Reed".
Nit; At the beginning of the film during the bank robbery, the penultimate robber is meant to have been hit and killed by the school bus as it backs into the bank. However if you watch closely it is clear that the bus no only doesn't touch the guy, but is in fact at least some six feet away from him before he moves, and stops a few feet from where he was standing.
Nit; When the tumbler is hit by the RPG it explodes, tips up and hits a low wall and starts rolling. The next scene showing the tumbler shows it smashing through a wall more or less top first. However the momentum from the earlier scene seems to indicate that the tumbler was about to stop rolling on its roof and start sliding.
Explanation; The private number the bank manager was calling was most likely to the mob. The bank was identified as a mob-bank by Gordon when he is viewing the vault and explaining about the marked bills.
Observation; The tumblers damage seen on screen matches the damage seen to have been done to the tumbler - principally that the rear left wheel is missing. This can be seen coming off the car as it smashes through the first wall.
Nit/Observation; Considering that Batman isn't meant to kill, it seems a little strange that he drives around in a car and on a bike that have heavy cannons fitted to them - and is willing to use them simply to clear a path for himself even when he has no way of knowing if there is anyone in the line of fire. He uses the bikes cannons to shatter a glass door - even though this is a public area with people walking around - and later to blow cars out of his way. Although the cars are parked he has no way of knowing if anyone is sitting inside one of them and about to pull out.
Nit; In the interrogation room while the Joker is baiting the cop shards of glass can be seen on the window sill above his head. Later he is holding one of these shards of glass to the cops throat. However when Bats slammed Jokers head into the windows of the interrogation room he only cracked the glass. For there to be shards of glass that size the window would have had to be broken, which it was not since that would have resulted in a hole you could see the viewing room through. Also had bats broken the window the shards would have been on the other side of the window - not inside the room.
Nit; Why didn't the cops shoot the Joker when he is holding the cop hostage? His head makes a wonderful target, there are cops off to the side and the guy is a known killer with a weapon held to the throat of someone. In other words there is no legal or practical reason for them not to have taken the shot - even the cop told them to just shoot the guy....
Observation; Just to confirm this. The Joker is defiantly wearing make-up on his face. Not only does the make-up rub off in the interrogation room. But white make-up can be clearly seem on his hands and fingers in both the interrogation room and when he is talking to Harvey in the Hospital.
Picked up the two-disc Blu-Ray at Wal-Mart last week; it was on sale (on Black Friday) for a mere five bucks. The film is presented in two aspect ratios. Most of the film is letterboxed with an AR of 2.40:1. But, the scenes that were in IMAX are blown up to 1.85:1. It doubtless worked in an IMAX theater (I saw it on a non-IMAX screen) but it's a bit pointless on home video.
LOL. A somewhat more dim-witted Batman.
Mr. Mendo of "The Agony Booth" nitpicks this movie in a video review (that contains some strong language). The review can be seen here. I wish Mendo had noted Aaron Eckhart's/Harvey Dent's outdated early 1980's hair style. 
A cross between The Dark Knight and Knightrider.
The turbo-boost scenes work the best, I think.
https://youtu.be/VIQ_xrQFMaY