.Kibbles said:No he just wants to look cool in being the only person to give TDK a negative review. Make them seem all tough and harsh. Bwahahha!
I love Burton movies but frankly his Batman is no where near Nolan's.SpeedingUptoStop said:Of course, the only bad review is some guy who prefers Burtman.
Marconelly said:It might have been mentioned already, but I was watching Ledger on that prologue on BB limited set last night, and was thinking how difficult it would be for someone to give this movie a negative review. Considering how good of a movie it really seems to be, and how fantastic Ledger seems to be in it, how much you would have to hate something about it - enough to rag on it, considering Ledger's ill fate during it's production?
Shut your freaking mouth, sir. This is not the thread for you to liberally pour out hater-ade.Amir0x said:i don't love Burton's movies and I hope one day they are all RAPTURED by Jesus so there are no copies left on Earth
Marconelly said:It might have been mentioned already, but I was watching Ledger on that prologue on BB limited set last night, and was thinking how difficult it would be for someone to give this movie a negative review. Considering how good of a movie it really seems to be, and how fantastic Ledger seems to be in it, how much you would have to hate something about it - enough to rag on it, considering Ledger's ill fate during it's production?
Amir0x said:i don't love Burton's movies and I hope one day they are all RAPTURED by Jesus so there are no copies left on Earth
reilo said:Anyone that prefers Burton's Gotham over Nolan's deserves to be castrated.
Twice.
And then again.
But hey, if we want to talk bad plot devices and other inanities then the Joker being the one who killed Batman's parents in the first Batman takes the absolute cake for stupid plot-twist.
There we go.Teh Hamburglar said:Gotham is as much a character in the comics as Batman himself. Nolan's Gotham was nothing more than a stand in for Chicago. Burton had a distinct identity. It was always present in every scene.
Teh Hamburglar said:Gotham is as much a character in the comics as Batman himself. Nolan's Gotham was nothing more than a stand in for New York. Burton had a distinct identity. It was always present in every scene.
Burton's Gotham was a lame gothic fantasy world built on a sounstage just like the settings of all his other movies. It's completely unfitting for a Batman story.Teh Hamburglar said:Whats the real difference between New York and Chicago? Its a dense urban environment. Talk about splitting hairs. Both are generic cityscapes. Burton's Gotham was not.
Aww shit http://nymag.com/listings/movie/you-dont-mess-with-the-z/ :lolRBelong2Us said:Regarding that NY Mag review.
It's a "Critics Pick" http://nymag.com/listings/movie/the-dark-knight/
"Critics Pick" movies from NY Mag are not marked as rotten reviews.
Cheebs said:And it makes perfect sense that Gotham in this series is a stand in for Chicago. There would be no gothic looking city in modern America and it's obvious this is meant to be taken as a serious drama.
Teh Hamburglar said:Whats the real difference between New York and Chicago? Its a dense urban environment. Talk about splitting hairs. Both are generic cityscapes. Burton's Gotham was not.
Teh Hamburglar said:This is my last post related to thits since its obvious people are assuming I'm faulting Nolan for his representation of Gotham. I'm not. I'm saying Burton's had a style to it. It was a main character. Nolan's was not made or intended to be.
Ok, that I can agree with.Teh Hamburglar said:This is my last post related to thits since its obvious people are assuming I'm faulting Nolan for his representation of Gotham. I'm not. I'm saying Burton's had a style to it. It was a main character. Nolan's was not made or intended to be.
reilo said:There are no words.
Yeah, he gave it one of the best reviews on metacritic (an 80)Snidely Whiplash said:
woodchuck said:im going with 120 million
Darko said:150+million
woxel1 said:Shut your freaking mouth, sir. This is not the thread for you to liberally pour out hater-ade.
JB1981 said:You told me Ebert's TDK review would be up today. You lied.
Right now?Amir0x said:I just don't appreciate the chronically dismissive approach to its source material that previous superhero movies have been like.
Sorry I meant Roeper's and whatever-his-name is. I always forget he's not on the show right now![]()
Christopher said:$85,000,000.00
That's not realistic in the slightest. $120-150 million opening weekend is more realistic.Ceres said:How dare you throw in a realistic number!
Cheebs said:Right now?He'll never return most likely, he can't speak anymore.
Teh Hamburglar said:This is my last post related to thits since its obvious people are assuming I'm faulting Nolan for his representation of Gotham. I'm not. I'm saying Burton's had a style to it. It was a main character. Nolan's was not made or intended to be.
Amir0x said:I just don't appreciate the chronically dismissive approach to its source material that previous superhero movies have been like.
Sorry I meant Roeper's and whatever-his-name is. I always forget he's not on the show right now![]()
it's kJB1981 said:Agreed. This is my main problem with his vision. The Batman I know doesn't live in an ordinary city. He inhabits a world as demented as his own fractured psyche.
JB1981 said:Ugh. Worst major critic working today.
JB1981 said:Agreed. This is my main problem with his vision. The Batman I know doesn't live in an ordinary city. He inhabits a world as demented as his own fractured psyche.
it looks fine. it just doesn't feel right to me. i like batman to feel otherworldly. just a personal preference.Mr. Spinnington said:it's k
this one looks better