User Reviews+ Show more
chidisima | lorena | |
desk tob | abbas_gdnfr | |
ass | fdg | |
chris browm | maica | |
The Dark Knight | deetaQ@yahoo.com | |
nguyenquangduc2008 | kuduc8a | |
rfywrey | minhlac19 | |
dacula21@hotmail.es | hubaldo | |
| fian |
About Movie+ Show more
 | With the help of Lieutenant Jim Gordon and District Attorney Harvey Dent, Batman sets out to destroy organized crime in Gotham for good. The triumvirate proves to be effective, but they soon find themselves prey to a rising criminal mastermind known as the Joker, who thrusts Gotham into anarchy and forces the Dark Knight ever closer to crossing the fine line between hero and vigilante.... (more) |
| Production Status : | In Production/Awaiting Release |
| Genres : | Action/Adventure, Crime/Gangster, Adaptation and Sequel |
News+ Show more
Op/Ed: Is a 'Dark Knight Return' in Batman's Film Future?
So as The Dark Knight steamrolls to $500 million dollars in domestic box office receipts, breaking all manners of all-time recordsalong the way, the only real remaining "storyline" for the film is how close can it get to all-time box office champ Titanic, currently the only movie in history sailing the $600 million dollar seas....(more) - 08 9 2008 6:08AMThere are the Oscar questions, of course - will Heath Ledger receive a posthumous nomination for his turn as the Joker, and can the film perhaps secure Best Picture and/or Best Director nominations? But we won't have any answers to those until early next year.
Comic book message boards abhor a vacuum, however, and these days in absence of anything that compelling to dissect about The Dark Knight, the focus of uber-fan energies is turning to the inevitable (the-sun-rises-in-the-morning sort of inevitable) next film in Warner Bros'. franchise.
Rumors and speculation focusing on possible villains and the actors who might play them are the fan forum fodder du jour, with names like Johnny Depp (The Riddler), Angelina Jolie (Catwoman), Philip Seymour Hoffman (The Penguin), and even Aaron Eckhart (as a Two-Face who apparently would enjoy a remarkable recovery) emerging from the pack.
And then there was that now infamous little exchange during last month's Comic-Con International: San Diego. Watchmen/300 director Zack Snyder reportedly mentioned that he'd like to see writer Frank Miller's seminal Batman graphic novel "The Dark Knight Returns" adapted into a big screen feature, with Miller later responding to Snyder's comment, "You can do it anytime you want to, Zack."
And Internet fandom was off and running...
As any self-respecting comic book reader knows, Miller's "The Dark Knight Returns" - first published in 1986 in a watershed moment for comics publishing - is a work whose influences are already pervasive in Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. Set in a not-too-distant future, the story - which helped give birth to (or at least popularize) the "grim and gritty" movement in comic books - finds a middle-aged Bruce Wayne emerge from a ten-year retirement as "the Batman" to battle his old nemeses Two-Face, the Joker - and even Superman.So while a big-screen adaptation of one of the industry's holy grails is already near the tops of any fanboy's greatest "Hopes" and "Fears" lists, speculation is now turning towards whether something that few thought would ever happen could actually become reality sooner, rather than later.
Today we're going to discuss the merits of the "sooner" camp...
The very "sooner" camp, in fact.
Now adapting "The Dark Knight Returns" for the screen would be a bold and audacious move for any director and the studio, as well as a road fraught with some treacherous obstacles. For one, the story's entire third act featuring a Superman under the thumb of the Federal government would almost certainly have to be abandoned, if for no other reason (and there are quite a few) that Nolan's vision for the first two films is far too "grounded" to suddenly introduce a super-strong, flying man who can survive a nuclear explosion (as he does in the story).
So whether it's an unlikely "faithful" adaptation, or the more-likely "loosely" adapted version, placed together in context, the clues are there that some manner of adaptation of "The Dark Knight Returns" is precisely the direction Nolan is going in for a third film.
Let's run through the clues one-by-one. And we'll be talking about The Dark Knight in very story-specific detail, so you three people left on Earth who have yet to see the movie, consider yourself "spoiler" warned.
What's In a Name?
OK, OK, this is the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence but sometimes the most obvious clues are the most telling.
What do you call a sequel to a film (which curiously broke the naming precedent of the five "Batman" films before it) called "The Dark Knight"? A film in which in its closing moments, the protagonist runs off into the night, literally chased by dogs, his future as the protector of Gotham City in doubt?
Why, if you want it to actually star the Dark Knight, you call it "The Dark Knight Returns" of course.
And if you're going to go through the trouble of calling it "The Dark Knight Returns", well then...
In a Word - "Escalation"
One doesn't have to speculate whether Nolan and his co-writers David S. Goyer and brother Jonathan Nolan understand the concept of "escalation" - they introduced it into the series themselves in the closing moments of Batman Begins. In fact, they wrapped the entire existence of Heath Ledger's the Joker around it.
The Dark Knight was clearly an "escalation" over Batman Begins in both theme and tone. The landscape was broader, the stakes higher, and the tragedies greater. Operatic in tone and grandiose in scale, Nolan has left himself one direction to take this story, and that's to its necessary end.
No matter how high-rent the actor (and the franchise can now afford very high rent), no other villain or villains are going to feel appropriately menacing - or satisfying - after the nihilistic embodiment of chaos Ledger and Nolan created.
The Joker killed Bruce Wayne's great love and destroyed the one person Batman thought could make him obsolete. He nearly seduced the very soul of Gotham City itself.
How in the world do you top that? How do you make the audience feel the stakes raise and not have the next installment feel like a breather?
By actually finishing that story, that's how. Which brings us to...
The Three Act Structure
There is little doubt Christopher Nolan understands what a three-act structure is, and every reason to believe he understands any storyteller is pushing their luck with any more than three (good luck Sam Raimi). Yes, a compelling argument can be made that Warner Bros. isn't going to put this cash cow out to pasture, and will want a new Batman movie every few years, but they can still have that, which we'll address later.
We'll also take Nolan at this word that he hasn't signed on for a next installment yet (and God bless him and the upcoming due reward he'll receive if he hasn't), but given his talents as a storyteller, it would be shocking if he a) was telling a story he didn't already know the ending to, breaking the cardinal rule of storytelling; and b) left the franchise without finishing the story by his own hand.
Nolan famously completed Batman Begins without "knowing" whether he'd do a second installment. That didn't stop him from laying the seeds for The Dark Knight in that first film's closing moments.
By leaving the Joker (literally) hanging at the end of The Dark Knight, Nolan left open-ended a story that begs to be finished. Even Tim Burton knew he had to kill Jack Nicholson at the "end". Nolan himself killed Ra's at the end of Batman Begins and he even tied-up a loose end regarding the Scarecrow in The Dark Knight. These are both clear signals Nolan knows the story has to have an end and has some idea for that end already in mind.
Nolan further foreshadows the future in The Dark Knight's climatic moments as well. Remember when the Joker tells Batman the two of them can "do this for years"? Filmmakers of Nolan's talent don't throw away lines like that, especially in a moment like that. That was the director signaling to the audience that he understands one of "The Dark Knight Returns'" main themes - that the Joker's very existence is primarily to be Batman's nemesis and their fates were inevitably intertwined, as well as a signal that their final showdown will in fact come years down the road.
Which brings us back to the three-act structure: Act One (Batman Begins) was the first Batman story. Act Two (The Dark Knight) was a classic tragic turning point.
So what does this demand Act Three be?
Well, not only the final battle of Batman and the Joker, but also the last Batman story, of course.
The Joker/Ledger Factor
By leaving the fate of the Joker open in The Dark Knight knowing the performance he had gotten from Ledger, Nolan also knew he was casting a shadow over the next film and any future installments until the character's story is finished - whomever happens to be behind the camera when it is.
While perhaps a marketing department's worst nightmare and admittedly macabre, Nolan could have made a different pragmatic decision in post-production and made the Joker's fate more "final". By leaving the character alive, Nolan knowingly left the next director the choice of either having to somehow make villains like the Penguin, the Riddler, or Catwoman more of a menace than they've ever been in the comic books, or using the Joker again.
And even if the former approach could be achieved, are moviegoers really going to be satisfied with the idea the Joker is simply sitting in prison somewhere, particularly given his jailbreak in The Dark Knight? The next film would be anti-climatic before it ever began.
It would make sense, however, that if Batman goes further underground (as suggested in The Dark Knight's ending), that the Joker would simply not even try to escape, his reason for being removed, a major element of "The Dark Knight Returns".
So that leaves this pragmatic question - given the circumstances, how do you finish the Batman/Joker story? Well, it would still be difficult, but by telling a story set 10, 15, 20 (?) years in the future, Nolan would buy himself some much-needed leeway to recast the Joker as an older man.
It would still be an unenviable task for both the director and whatever actor accepted that challenge, but it just might provide some measure of wiggle room.
So here's the recapped case for the next film being an adaptation (on some level) of "The Dark Knight Returns".
1.) The Dark Knight's title and ending makes the next film being called "The Dark Knight Returns" logical.
2.) The next film needs to further "escalate" the series, and be even bigger and bolder than The Dark Knight.
3.) Nolan seems to be crafting a three-act structure, and left the Joker's fate open to be a major element of a final act.
4.) The "Dark Knight Returns" future setting gives Nolan some "room" to help recast the Joker.And the Case Against?
As mentioned, in the context of the world Nolan has created in the first two movies, some parts of "The Dark Knight Returns" are un-filmable. Superman's role in the story and the whole third act are impossible to make work. To refine this theory, we're effectively talking about liberally adapting the main elements of the first two acts of Frank Miller's story.
A 14 year-old girl running around in a Robin costume doesn't make much sense in the Nolan Bat-verse either, although given the 'Batman imitators' element the director introduced in The Dark Knight, a young disciple who could serve a similar role as Carrie does in TDKR wouldn't be too hard to imagine.
Then there is the question of finality. The Dark Knight is on its way to becoming the second-highest grossing film of all time. Why, oh why, would Warner Bros. produce a film that could potentially be perceived by audiences as the last story in the franchise?
Well, here's the thing - that's happened once already, unintentionally. Joel Schumacher's Batman & Robin almost killed the big-screen Batman.
The success of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight prove moviegoers are a forgiving lot, and (like comic book fans) understand the nature of a self-contained story arc. While in-story internal logic requires "continuity", doesn't Nolan's relaunch of the franchise indicate fans will accept new creative visions that aren't necessarily related to previous ones? That fans want a good story; not necessarily a next one?
Perhaps the wisest thing Warner Bros could do is let talented filmmakers like Nolan tell their own stories in the classic, satisfying three-act structure, instead of just trying to keep films rolling out in serial fashion to higher costs, even higher expectations, and eventual lesser returns. To let new filmmakers relaunch and reinvent the adaptable franchise again (and again, and again) on his or her own terms.
We just can't shake this feeling that this is exactly what they're going to do.
Related Stories:
The Dark Knight's 'Returns' Pass $400 Million
Dark Knight Director Christopher Nolan Interview
Dark Knight Writer David Goyer - "This One IS Better"- Original Story: Op/Ed: Is a 'Dark Knight Return' in Batman's Film Future?
Visit Newsarama.com is the place for comic book news, previews & reviews, plus TV shows & movies.
Not even Batman can save Time Warner stock
LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - "The Dark Knight" has taken in $324.3 million at the North American box office sofar and is on its way to becoming one of the biggest movies of all time....(more) - 07 30 2008 7:04PMWay to go, Warner Bros. It's already the studio's biggest film ever, surpassing the $318 million earned domestically by 2001's "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone."
Now, if only some smart executive could figure out a way for Time Warner shareholders to benefit from all that success.
The stock of Time Warner, the movie studio's parent company, has languished for years, and even a box office superhero like Batman hasn't come to shareholders' rescue. Not yet, at least.
Shares of TW were at $14.70 on July 18, the opening day for "Dark Knight." They closed at $14.36 the following Monday, after the movie shattered the opening-weekend box office record. On Tuesday, the stock traded at $14.57.
For those optimistic shareholders who figure it must be a case of buying the rumor (or in this case, the hype) and selling the news (in this case, the weekend record), that's just wishful thinking.
Check a TW chart leading up to the film's record-breaking performance, and it's all downhill.
One could argue that the "Dark Knight" hype began January 22, the date of the untimely death of Heath Ledger, the actor who plays the Joker. On that day, TW was at $15.06, higher than where it closed Tuesday. And if you figure the hype didn't really kick into overdrive until the first day of summer, well, the stock has dropped since then, too. Actually, one almost could pick any random day this year and the stock is lower now than it was then.
So it appears that one of the biggest movies of all time has done nothing for shareholders of the company that made the film, distributed it and will collect the bulk of its profits. And let's not forget that TW also is parent of DC Comics, where Batman was born, so profits ought to be rolling into that unit off of "Dark Knight" as well.
So if TW shareholders aren't benefiting from the success of "Dark Knight," whose shareholders are?
Mattel's might be. The day "Dark Knight" opened, Mattel shares jumped 13%. That's also the day Mattel reported a better-than-expected second-quarter profit and Batman-related toys got some of the credit, along with "Kung Fu Panda" toys.
But Mattel also won a legal victory that day that ultimately might give the company royalties from the popular Bratz dolls franchise, which caused the shares to spike more so than did "Dark Knight."
Nevertheless, if investors were looking to profit from "Dark Knight," they'd have made a killing buying Mattel a few days ahead of the movie's opening, and they'd have lost money buying shares of TW.
Imax also would have been a better pick than TW. While its shares haven't budged much since the movie's opening, they are up 15% in the past month, and it's hard to argue that "Dark Knight" is not the catalyst.
The movie opened at 94 Imax theaters, and showings were sold out weeks in advance. So popular was "Dark Knight" at Imax theaters on opening weekend that tickets sometimes went for $50 at Internet auction sites like eBay.
But all is not lost for TW, as patient investors eventually will see a "Dark Knight" benefit, if nothing else as a counterweight to the underperformance of "Speed Racer."
"Dark Knight," says Steve Birenberg of Northlake Capital Management, "is a nice confidence booster as the spinoff from cable makes TW more reliant on successful content creation for long-term growth."
Independent production company Legendary Pictures put up more than half the money to make and market the movie, so when it's all said and done, Birenberg figures that if "Dark Knight" can manage $800 million in worldwide box office, Warners' take will be roughly $440 million.
Also, Birenberg says, the blockbuster "reminds investors that movies can still be big and profitable, and that supports multiples on stocks of studio owners."
Along those lines, UBS analyst Michael Morris says that TW trades at an operating-income multiple of just 6.9, and he expects that to rise to 8, giving him a $19 target price for TW shares within a year's time.
But any way you slice it, "Dark Knight" also is proof that no matter how big a movie is, if it's just one asset at a company expected to bring in annual revenue of $47 billion, it won't be enough to immediately move the stock much.
Reuters/Hollywood Reporter
The Dark Knight Reigns: $155.3 Mil Weekend
Los Angeles (E! Online) - Spider-Man Batman forever.The Dark Knight chased Spider-Man 3 from the record books with a $155.3 op
ening weekend gross, per Exhibitor Relations Co. estimates today....(more) - 07 21 2008 6:22AMThe figure capped three days of eye-popping figures for the Christopher Nolan film. The highlights:
• The Dark Knight made more money in Friday midnight screenings ($18.5 million) than its predecessor, Batman Begins, made in any one day. • The Dark Knight made more money in one day ($66.4 million on Friday) than Batman Begins made in any one weekend. • The Dark Knight made about as much money in its second-biggest day ($48 million on Saturday) as Batman Begins made in its biggest weekend ($48.7 million).
• The Dark Knight made more money in its third-biggest day ($39 million on Sunday) than Get Smart and You Don't Mess With the Zohan, to name two recent hits, made in their respective opening weekends. • The Dark Knight made more money in its biggest day than Hancock, WALL-E and Kung-Fu Panda, to name three recent supersize hits, made in their respective opening weekends. • The Dark Knight made more money in its opening weekend than the previous top-three-opening Batman movies (Batman Forever, Batman Begins, Batman Returns) made in their opening weekends—combined. About the only thing The Dark Knight didn't do was keep up the frenetic pace it set with Friday's $66.4 million blowout, a performance which set new records as Hollywood's biggest-ever opening day and biggest-ever single day.
"Some people probably stayed away [to avoid] the crowds," Exhibitor Relations' Jeff Bock said.
Bock does not think audiences will stay away next weekend. He expects The Dark Knight will become only the second movie this summer, after Iron Man, to hold the No. 1 position at the box office for more than one weekend.
"Spider-Man 3 was savaged by critics, and it fell off pretty quickly," Bock said. "I don't expect anything to happen with The Dark Knight."
Especially not with the Heath Ledger factor at play.
To Bock, The Dark Knight's box office benefited immensely from both curiosity and buzz surrounding Ledger's performance as iconic Batman foe The Joker. The role was the last completed by the young actor before his death in January.
"This is really unprecedented, an actor in a blockbuster film dying before the release," Bock said.
"Unprecedented" is one word to sum up the weekend.
"Batman" is another.
More box office highlights:
• The Dark Knight powered Hollywood to its biggest-ever weekend, as the top 12 films combined to gross $255 million. • Batman or no, records or no, Hollywood is still down for the year in ticket sales (off 1.3 percent) and attendance (off 4 percent). • If not for The Dark Knight—a very big if—Mamma Mia! would have been the story of the weekend. The ABBA-powered Broadway musical turned Meryl Streep vehicle scored an estimated $27.6 million. If the estimate holds, it'll have the record for biggest debut for a musical, edging the $27.5 million posted last year by Hairspray. • Hancock's legs held up well, all Bat things considered. In its third weekend, the Will Smith superhero movie took in another $14 million (third place), and raised its overall total to $191.5 million. Worldwide, it stands at a lofty $444 million. • Hellboy II got the short end of the superhero stick. The comic-spawned franchise fell from first to fourth, and from nearly $36 million to barely $10 million. Overall, it has grossed $56.4 million after two weekends. • Space Chimps (seventh place, $7.4 million) posted the biggest-ever debut for a movie with the word "chimps" in the title.
• Eddie Murphy's Meet Dave ($1.6 million; $9.4 million overall) fell out of the Top 10 after a one-weekend stay, making Mike Myer's The Love Guru feel better. • Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull ($970,000) likewise dropped from the Top 10. Unlike Meet Dave, it enjoyed eight weekends there, and presumably is enjoying its $312.6 million domestic take even more. • In limited release, the cold-vacation-from-hell thriller Transsiberian, starring Woody Harrelson, scared up $35,216 at only two theaters. Its per-screen average ($17,608) was the weekend's best after...wait for it...The Dark Knight. Here's a recap of the top-grossing weekend films based on Friday-Sunday estimates compiled by Exhibitor Relations:
• The Dark Knight, $155.3 million • Mamma Mia!, $27.6 million • Hancock, $14 million • Journey to the Center of the Earth, $11.9 million • Hellboy II: The Golden Army, $10 million • WALL-E, $9.8 million • Space Chimps, $7.4 million • Wanted, $5.1 million • Get Smart, $4.1 million • Kung Fu Panda, $1.8 million
Partner Sites : Koreanmovie.com| Searchgate.com| Gameshot.com| Realestateattorney.com
회사소개 자주묻는질문 개인정보보호정책 이용약관 문의하기 프레스룸 사이트맵 광고문의 파트너쉽 RSS 피드
Copyright © 2007 Ganges.com - Top 10 free video clips, funny videos, crazy videos All Rights Reserved
