It looks cool, I agree. I question the timing, though. This is more of a cool teaser poster, rather than one I'd want to hang on my wall. Especially after the deluge of awesomeness that we've seen in the last couple months. This would've been fantastic coming right after the first theatrical trailer.

An official site is up for the soundtrack release. Brief, high-quality samples of the tracks "I'm Not a Hero", "Why So Serious?", and "Aggressive Expansion". "WSS?", the Joker's theme, is very punk rock, and it kicks my ass. I still don't know exactly what makes the "Special Edition" so special, I just know I gotta have it.

edit: And we've broken 3 pages. 

For me it's the other way around. The last poster is the only one I'd seriously consider hanging on my wall.

Just read a fantastic review of the movie in Rolling Stone. Made me want to wet myself.

The IMAX theater near where I work still has tickets available for their 3:15am showing the first day of release. I will already be down that way anyhow seeing Eddie Izzard Thursday night, so maybe I'll just hang around and watch this one on the REALLY big screen. :D

Pretty much every review out so far is calling an Oscar nod for Heath inevitable. Just take a look at this scene (unless you want to wait).
Comparisons are being thrown about to Godfather, Part II and The Empire Strikes Back. I'm in bunches.

I'll be going to the IMAX in Charlotte on the 19th. Surprisingly, the website is not showing midnight on the 18th "Sold Out", but that may just be an oversight. Anyone planning to go to an early showing better buy their tickets online.
Dark Knight has already broken the record set by Spiderman 3 for pre-release ticket sales.

Yeah, the IMAX near my work sold out of their midnight screening with lightning quickness. Seems that not as many people are keen about the 3:15 showing. :) My luck.

BTW PF, I see you listened to some VAST this morning. I approve. :D

Hey, Recently-Played-Tracks-buddy.

Aaand my tickets are bought. 4:45pm showing on Saturday the 19th. My group went with the later afternoon showing so we'd have enough time to get down there. But now I realize I'll be climbing the walls that day.

Speaking of IMAX tickets...

whysoserious.com/kickingandscreening/

Score some free ones for a Tuesday night showing, provided you live near one of the cities on the list. I don't, of course.

SOLD OUT 

Yeah, I am going to see it sometime this week.  I am unsure if I am going to go to the midnight show or the next day.

Ok, someone must have seen the midnight showing!! Spill it!! (minus the spoilers)

QUOTE EvenReven: About selling out, Insomnia is actually a remake, and the result of some bright Hollywood executive thinking that if we just water down the original Norwegian film, put Al Pacino in the lead, add some clearer sense of morality and - to top it off - disguise it as an original... then it will be a hit. Not exactly the avant garde of anything, except maybe cynicism. I think Nolan has a lot more integrity nowadays. (And I was never that crazy about Memento.) I'm also confused about the supposed fact that Burton's films are like the comic books. They're not, neither in storylines (no Batman story had had Joker killing Bruce's parents), nor in style: the fairy-tale/German Expressionism silliness of Batman Returns looks more like a pastiche like The Hudsucker Proxy than an actual comic book. Batman Begins, on the other hand, was pretty close to the Miller/Mazzucchelli classic "Year One." It also seems like The Dark Knight will take stuff from both the classic O'Neil/Adams stories and newer stuff like Loeb/Sale's "The Long Halloween." So I don't get what you're saying at all. Keep in mind the camp sensibility of the Schumacher franchise hadn't really been a part of Batman since the 60s. In the 30s, 40s, early 50s and again in the 70s through to today Batman had a sturm und drang for kids thing going. It's deeply serious. Schumacher betrayed that and fucked the character over. At least Adam West was funny while doing it.

I knew Insomnia is a remake, but that doesn't make it worse at all costs. I still think it's Nolan's best, together with Following. Like you, I am not crazy about Memento. I loved Memento the first time I saw it and with the later viewings, it got me thinking it was somewhat useless as a movie. Although some factors were still good, especially the acting and the soundtrack & sound effects.

Reading your experienced reasonings on how Batman Begins is closer and more faithful to the comic book, I must tell you that I'm not a fan of comic books at all. I'm just a movie buff who happens to watch some of these profusional comic-book inspired productions  that Hollywood seems to take as infinite source of creativity. The point to me is that there is nothing creative about all this. Everything seems so studio controlled, CGI-ed and who knows what else. I know my judgement is dictated by pure prejudice, but Christopher Nolan just simply stopped being the film-maker I liked in his first three works. He later switched completely to fantasyland, even with The Prestige which was entertaining and had some great performances, but it was trying too hard to be smart. But that's okay. I just don't like him anymore. I found Batman Begins a miserable attempt to resume the Batman saga, but I will keep watching  this new saga because I think watching Heath Ledger's last performance as the Joker is a prerogative.

I'm just a movie buff who happens to watch some of these profusional comic-book inspired productions that Hollywood seems to take as infinite source of creativity. The point to me is that there is nothing creative about all this. Everything seems so studio controlled, CGI-ed and who knows what else. 

So after watching (I'm presuming) Fantastic 4, Spiderman, and Batman Begins, you decided Begins was the one that was uncreative and CGI-heavy? Okay.

Since you've mentioned you're going to see it anyway, I hope that you look beyond your "prejudice" and find Dark Knight an enjoyable experience. Myself, I've still got about 25 hours to go, and I know I'm going to have a blast.

I don't think Insomnia is bad either, but you were mixing in perceived motives with notions of quality and that's dangerous business. Don't think for one second that because you don't like comic books that must mean that Nolan is more cynical when he decides to tackle The Batman than when he decides to remake a Norwegian film you can reasonably disguise as an original work. And speaking of motives, Tim Burton's Batman came out at a time when the Batman franchise was at an all-time high. The Frank Miller stories (The Dark Knight Returns and Year One) had recently come out, and Moore and Bolland's The Killing Joke was still pretty new. Morrison's Arkham Asylum became the biggest-selling graphic novel ever released the same year Burton's film was released. The franchise was well-planned. Those are motives.

When it comes to quality, I actually, partly inspired by this thread, watched Burton's film again two days ago. And man oh man is that film worse than I remembered. The casting alone is disastrous, but it's the heavy-handed directorial style that sinks it. Basinger and Keaton have no chemistry whatsoever, and the cheap Prince tie-in (were we talking about cynicism?) is just stupid. The woods around Wayne Manor look like Sleepy Hollow. I think I already mentioned the papier-maché sets, suffice it to say that they look ten times worse than I remembered.

I hate CGI too, but Begins used very little CGI. In fact, large portions of the city were built as a mammoth set like in the old days. Same with the Batmobile and the cave. As for studio-controlled, I doubt you'll see a more subversive summer blockbuster all decade. The image of a burning skyscraper alone is evidence that Nolan can do pretty much what he wants with this.

In short, I'm not gonna stop you from disliking Begins, but your actual reasons make no sense to me.

PS: As for uncreative and Begins, it actually takes some very creative liberties with the comic books it's based on. Ra's Al Ghul is reimagined as an enigmatic leader of an millennia-old sect instead of a centuries-old terrorist/magician-type, the Scarecrow looks nothing like what he usually does, etc. etc. But these changes are obviously done with a knowledge of the source material. Burton's insistence that the Joker shot Bruce's parents made him look like a fool because it disrupted the whole Bats/Joker dynamic. Batman created the Joker, not the other way around. (And besides, they should be roughly the same age.)

 I caught it at midKnight & quite enjoyed it, yes, I did.  AS for SPOILERS, let's just say that a few characters died that surprised me. Ledger's take on the Joker is supremely idiosyncratic  (his voice reminded me very much of Al Franken's!!!).  It was pretty surprising in spots,  more or less predictable in others.  Maggie G. was fine as Rachel, but I still preferred Katie Holmes.  I'll likely see it in the theater again & am anticipating numero tres...

I saw it at midnight.  It was a great movie.  Heath was awesome as the Joker.  It is a movie of one moral argument after another.  I didn't really think of just how many moral arguments were in the movie, because it is a comic book movie until the movie was over and I starting thinking about it.  It is a movie that really makes you think a lot.  SPOILER This isn't really a spoiler but I am unsure if I agree with the moral argument at the end of the film.  I have thought about it a lot and there is one more movie so it may take this further. 

I'm just a movie buff who happens to watch some of these profusional comic-book inspired productions that Hollywood seems to take as infinite source of creativity. The point to me is that there is nothing creative about all this. Everything seems so studio controlled, CGI-ed and who knows what else.

So after watching (I'm presuming) Fantastic 4, Spiderman, and Batman Begins, you decided Begins was the one that was uncreative and CGI-heavy? Okay.

Since you've mentioned you're going to see it anyway, I hope that you look beyond your "prejudice" and find Dark Knight an enjoyable experience. Myself, I've still got about 25 hours to go, and I know I'm going to have a blast.

I didn't see Fantastic 4. I've seen the Spiderman saga (I hope they are done with it, though). I did not say Batman Begins is uncreative. I think they're all uncreative. They're meant to be just entertaining and bust the blocks as soon as possible and I don't think Batman Begins and Dark Night are that different from Spiderman, although the style is evidently different. What I'm trying to prove here is not that the Batman new saga sucks. They're good with no doubt. But what if Begins and Dark Night were given into the hands of regular Hollywood directors? I wouldn't have had any problems. But since NOLAN is making these movies, I'm wondering what the hell is he going to do after Batman 3? Because there will be a third. The bets are open. I know they're kind of open, but the lead actors in this kind of films are always kind of forced to sign for a 3-movie contract? Isn't that depressing. I didn't mean studio controlled as you got it. I know that nowadays certain directors manage to do their own thing also when they are under a major's contract. What I'm saying is that everything is planned and very few things seem to be dictated by artistic ideas. So, I don't think Nolan will g back to Followings, Mementos and Insomnias...  He will enter the great olympus and we will never see the director we used to admire.

Sam Raimi, at least, has never said he makes arty movies. He is honest and definitely more experienced in this genre. He's become a producer, he's a business man and he doesn't have to prove anything to anyone. Nolan, otherwise, has to prove everything because he's done just a couple of serious movies.

I still don't get what you're saying. You're basically disappointed that your idol Christopher Nolan has been sullied with touching a superhero comic, is that it? Then why doesn't the same apply to Burton?

The contract for three films is basically a guideline, and I'm pretty sure that Nolan would have been able to walk out of it if he really wanted to. In fact, he didn't even want to make a sequel until he started thinking that he could do something exciting with the Joker. Also worth remembering is that Burton had a three-picture deal too (he even had a script and preliminary casting), but Warner threw him out after Returns.

I honestly think you're confusing what a genre really is and what it takes to operate within one. That Raimi has done Evil Dead doesn't mean that he somehow easily could do Spider-Man. They don't really have much in common. "Entertaining" is not a genre. Have you seen A Simple Plan? It has nothing in common with either. And Raimi had everything to prove, especially after the successful X-Men film. Bryan Singer was the one with nothing to prove, coming out of a decade that had no good superhero movies in it.

As for what Nolan will do after a third Batman film (in the unlikely event that it happens), your guess is as good as mine. After Begins he directed The Prestige, so my guess would be that Jonathan Nolan will write something very un-superhero-like for him.

And, just for the record, I kinda resent the implication that everyone who would ever write a comic (or make a film from one) are doing it for the money. There's a difference between Spiderman and Catwoman (the dreadful one with Halle Berry) and easy generalisations like "they're all uncreative" doesn't take that into consideration at all.

As for what Nolan will do after a third Batman film (in the unlikely event that it happens), your guess is as good as mine.

He's been attached to an big-screen adaptation of The Prisoner for years, but the upcoming miniseries update might put the kebosh on that.

Few more hours to go. 

Yeah, I knew about that one. I doubt the film version will happen when it's competing with a Granada TV mini-series starring Ian McKellen. Maybe in ten years or so.

Have fun!  

Evidently I'm not very clear in making a point... or maybe I'm not trying to make any. By saying it's all very uncreative, I'm saying this mania of making movies inspired by comic books is sort of generally killing creativity in the film-making universe. Let's say that I'm really bored and unimpressed by the recent Hollywood productions.

I really need David Lynch to make a new movie! 

I'm saying this mania of making movies inspired by comic books is sort of generally killing creativity in the film-making universe.

Catering to "the market", test audiences, and focus groups have competition then.

I really need David Lynch to make a new movie!

I just hope some Hollywood studio types put some constraints on him this time, or we'll end up with another self-indulgent mess like his last one.

Thoughts on the film this thread is about later.

Might be the best superhero film of all time.  Ledger was classic.  Better than Nicholson. 

Can't wait for the next one.

Then I hear this bizarre story in the news today about Christian Bale being arrested for assault on his mother and sister.  WTF?

i only have 1 complaint - not enough JOKER!!!

They should've skipped the entire Two Face story (maybe introduced Harvey but not change him yet) and stuck soley with Joker.

Otherwise, I really am having a hard time saying anything really bad about the movie.

Speaking of good movies - I hope Watchmen turns out well! EW had a nice piece on it this past week and the trailer looked great!

Yeah, I knew about that one. I doubt the film version will happen when it's competing with a Granada TV mini-series starring Ian McKellen. Maybe in ten years or so.

I hope they give it a good updating for these modern times, with dialogue like this:
- You are Number...
- I am not a NUMBER!
- You are Number 6... I am Number 2.
- Oh, you're Number 2 all right.
 

They should've skipped the entire Two Face story (maybe introduced Harvey but not change him yet) and stuck soley with Joker.

I've heard riffs on this suggestion a lot in the past week, and I'll admit that when I was sitting in the theater I thought, 'You know, they could end it right when Harvey clutches his bandages and screams, and leave the rest for the next one.' 'Cause we've all been hardwired by franchise tradition to expect "the next one". But the truth with TDK is that it contains everything Nolan wanted to tell in a Batman story that he hadn't explored in Begins. Hence, no "Joker card"-like teaser at the end. The money dump truck that will be showing up at Nolan's house notwithstanding, another movie following this particular storyline is not a certainty.

There be spoilers ahead.

Everyone, and I mean everyone, was expecting Two-Face to "see himself become the villain" in Bats 3. No one was expecting him to die (I was one of those confused viewers who initially thought he was just unconscious). But Harvey would have no motivation to carry on as the Big Bad through an entire movie. His character arch is a full one in this film, and serves as the backbone of the film's themes. The story wouldn't have packed the same emotional punch without his tragic fall.