Going to see it right now! Then Avatar! Sweet. Will chime in later...

Man oh man oh man oh man

Best movie of the summer. (Iron Man is a close 2nd though)

Quite possibly best super-hero movie ever.

Spider-man 3 doesn't even deserve to hold the top opening weekend gross spot compared to this. Not by a long shot. And I actually liked Spider-man 3.

Warning.....spoilers may lie ahead....



The pencil trick? As something that the joker does not more than about 30 seconds after the first time he is truly on screen (bank stuff doesn't count at this point, IMO)?? Amazing. Made me about jump out of my chair. I can understand if people don't think it's Oscar worthy, but I've seen some of the other stuff that gets Oscar nominations and have thought the same about it myself sometimes. So, different strokes for different folks I guess. The thing that got me with this was the fact that I could hardly even recognize the man Heath Ledger behind the character. It was SO far different from ANYTHING he's ever done. We truly lost an AMAZING actor this year. It really sucks that he didn't get to actually enjoy the fruits of all his hard effort. Absolutely stunning. The Joker gave me chills on multiple occasions throughout the film. One of my other favorite parts still is the hospital scene, were he goes slightly on the campy, silly joker side for just a second with the faulty detonator. Was pulled off perfectly.

Coming out of the film both myself and one of the friends with us said almost at the same time "THAT is how you make a super hero movie". That was SO much like the original ideas behind Batman. Amazing. And not to let Ledger steal too much of the glory, as Bale was outstanding in this one as well. And one thing my wife noticed, which I thought was sweet, was that we saw a LOT more of Batman and less of Bruce Wayne this time around, which was ultra sweet.

I loved how they didn't get bogged down in all the tech with this one either. Quickly showed off new gadgets, but didn't dwell on it like the first one. It was necessary for Batman Begins, to help show his origins, but not necessary for TDK, and Nolan did a superb job of keeping the focus in the right place. It will pretty much be impossible for Nolan to out do this one, I think. Still, plenty of great villains out there for future installments. Scarecrow's cameo in the beginning of TDK was great, and unexpected, as all the trailers and such kept me thinking the film would center on Joker and Two-Face, so Scarecrow being in there just that short amount was a nice touch for some continuity to BB.

Wow......

Can't wait to see it again. Though I'm not sure the Joker will still be AS creepy the 2nd time around, but it is worth seeing AT LEAST once more.

Wow. Excellent movie. It's hard to even compare it to Begins cause it felt like such a different movie. Ledger was trully amazing throughout. The hospital sequence is definately up there on the best cinematic experience I have EVER had. Can't wait to see it again. While it definately had its moments, there was still some things that made the overall movie suffer. First was length. There where definately times I was looking at my watch wondering when this was going to end (and not in a good way). Second was Maggie Gyllenhaal. I really don't like Katie Holmes and thought anyone could do better. I was wrong. Not only was her acting disturbing, I found the rottweilers alot more attractive then she came off in this movie. Yikes. Like Lobo, I too think it was very good and just a little better than Ironman. Definatley up near the top of the alltime list.

Tomorrow, going tomorrow!

I'm just beyond happy that the Idiot Tim Burton hasn't made them. He ruined Batman for years after his crap.
I can't wait to see it, going on Monday. I hope it isn't sold out.

I would disagree. You can see Burton's influences on the Animated Series. And there is very much 2 ways to do Batman, each having their own merits. There is the dark, serious Batman, which Nolan is using as his basis, then there is the campy Batman, made famous by Adam West's TV series. Burton was a bit of a mix. Shoemaker, however, took it very campy, among other things...

Hmm...yeah, gonna have to disagree with you there. You may be thinking of "Batman Forever" or "Batman and Robin" both of which were pretty much spoofs that weren't directed by Burton. The original Batman pretty much revived the character after the horrible Adam West and Superfriends shows. This newfound popularity eventually led to the amazing Batman: Animated Series, JLU, and Batman Beyond. Not to mention Begins and TDK themselves.

"Idiot"? Come now, sure "Corpse Bride" sucked but "The Nightmare Before Christmas" is classic.

More on topic...saw it again today. Still awesome.

Normally, I view the theater as a waste of money since all movies hit the DVD rental shelf at half the cost of a ticket (and the whole family can watch instead of paying per viewer), so I just don't go there very often. It has to be a REALLY special occasion, or something I want to see on the big screen.

The last movie I went to see before this summer was I Am Legend. Since then, I've seen Hulk, Hancock, and now Batman.

If you don't see another movie this summer, see Batman. Even if you are not a comic book fan (I'm not much of one), you will love this for the great movie that it is. It may be the first movie that acknowledges the fact that fans of comic book heroes like Batman are not perpetual 12-year-olds (a lesson George Lucas could have stood to hear before making TPM).

Batman broke a 3rd record, taking in $155mil this weekend and breaking Spidey 3's record weekend by $4mil. Interesting to see what the actual take is going to be and not just the estimate...

I do not care for Tim Burton. I watched the 1989 Batman a few months ago, and said to myself, "Wow, this thing sucked." I have no idea how it made the money it did 19 years ago. I thought it was just too poorly acted; I did not like Nicholson as the Joker, and I thought Michael Keaton played a bad Bruce Wayne (his Batman was good though).

On another note, I would like to express how much I hate all other Tim Burton movies. I just can't stand 'em.

See, I didn't feel that way at all. I never once looked at my watch. There were several times were I figured the movie was nearing its end, but then something crazy would happen, and it would keep going. But never once did it cause me to look at my watch and go "Woah, we still have an hour left." Then again, I would much rather get my money's worth out of the $10 ticket, so movies that are 90 minutes or less kind of get on my nerves anymore. It's hard to fully develop new characters in that sort of time frame, IMO.



Wow, harsh! LOL. Actually, I liked her better than Holmes. Can't say it was anything awe-inspiring, but she did have quite a few other things to contend with, and next to Bale, Ledger, Caine, and Eckhart, you'd be hard pressed to get your acting skills to shine enough to be noticeable. She wasn't anything special to me, but than again, she wasn't the focus of the movie anyways. If a 5th string character is your big disappointment with the movie, then now we're really nit-picking, hahaha.

I'm the same way. Prior to this I saw Iron Man and I can't even remember the last thing i saw in a theater before Iron Man.

To get an idea of how good this was. My mother, who has never read a comic book in her life, loved it and is looking forward to seeining it again. Same reaction for Iron Man which she did see twice and wants to see a third time.

Yes, I heard that, but what they're not reporting is that ticket prices are higher today than they were even 1 year ago.

Were we watching the same movie?

Which is why I wish they would report it in terms of # of tickets sold, not how much money it made. I think the statistic is still that with current inflation rates, Gone With the Wind would still hold the top-grossing movie of all time by a LOT, if I'm remembering correctly. The fact that TDK was specially filmed to take advantage of IMAX showings as well helped I'm sure, as people likely paid extra to see the IMAX showings rather than on a standard screen.



LOL. Seriously? Batman, Joker, Two-Face, and Gordon all rank as characters more important to the film, IMO. All Rachel Dawes was needed in the film for was to bridge to the previous film a bit, and provide the 'necessary' love interest for the film. Sitting here right now, the only thing that really pops out at me as 'focusing' on the character of Rachel was the choice between saving her or saving Dent. And even then, I never felt like the film focused in on her enough for the success of the movie to hinge on how good of an actress she was or wasn't. Honestly, I felt like she was better than Katie Homes, and that was enough for me.

Yep, I get it. I am not saying it was bad, and am definately nit-picking here. I am just transformed after always wanting everything shown to me, then watched AOTC in the IMAX when that was new and they had to cut out 20min to fit it on the reels. I remember thinking that would be horrible and it ended up being one of the best movie experiences I have ever had and to this day think it is the best cut of the film I have seen. Then I saw LOTR and that about killed me. So, I am just thinking 10 or 15 min shorter is all.



I really liked her in Stranger than fiction, so I was happy she replaced Holmes. I just didn't like her at all in this movie.




Yeah and it also was in 4,366 theaters so records don't mean squat. Overall money, though does.

I don't want to risk giving anything away so I have to be careful what I say here. I think it's important for the audience to care about the character of Rachel Dawes and if you don't, it's hard to appreciate the implications of the second half of the film.

You sort of make my point for me, I just noticed:



To be honest, I really didn't see what all Batman and Harvey Dent's fuss over her was about. She was very 1-dimensional.

What impressed me about the story was that no one ever really caught on that above all else, the Joker could not be trusted. Everything he said was only half-truth, but they continued to take him at his word.

Yeah, I can understand that to some degree. But I don't think that I, as the viewer, needed to care about Rachel, just that it was clear to me that Bruce and Harvey cared about her, which to me, was very evident.



Well, as a bridge from the first film, we knew Bruce was into her being the child-hood friend and all, and that point, besides Alfred, the only person who knew his secret. Besides, she had basically promised to wait for him until Batman was no longer needed. As for Harvey's interest, we didn't get any of that sort of back story, it just started there, so you have to take it on faith that there's a reason there. I didn't think it was too far-fetched at all, so I just went with it, and didn't demand any proof for the circumstances. Worked OK for me.



LOL, like the cop in the detention cell with him? Saw that one coming. Even now I was realizing that it was the Joker who asked the question "He's out of ammo, right?" to the other henchman in the bank heist, practically getting the other guy killed in the process, lol. Brilliant way to 'kill two birds with one stone' lol.

The funny thing was, so many of the other characters wanted to take him seriously because they knew he was killing people, but on the other hand, the Joker came off like so much of a fruit-loop that they almost disregarded him and the fact that he could actually plan these diabolical deeds. Point-in-case, the other inmate at the jail who the Joker 'fixed' his insides.


EDIT: 3000 posts! Woah!!

I only rented the first one, and can't tell you anything about it, it was so forgettable.

LOL, Dennis. You're a tough man to please.