<![CDATA[Gawker: The Dark Knight]]> http://cache.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/gawker.com.png <![CDATA[Gawker: The Dark Knight]]> http://gawker.com/tag/the dark knight http://gawker.com/tag/the dark knight <![CDATA[ Must The Office Be So Serious? ]]> The Office still offers plenty of laughs, but a certain reckless need to humiliate the characters has been missing from the show lately. This week that will change when the show's Halloween episode will feature a Dark turn from office perv Creed. The full episode preview, along with the latest information on Angela and Andy's nuptials, comes after the jump.

The show hasn't abandoned the pure torture of its characters entirely: it was depressing and sort of appropriate that we found out Pam's ex-fiance Roy now works at the Vitamin Store — but come on, you should see his employee discount. And yes, the developing chemistry between Michael Scott and his HR rep makes a place deep inside of us cry out in pain.

But it's time the show's writers got back to doing what it is they do best: really screwing with these people until the viewer can no longer comfortably watch what occurs. The coming blessing of Angela and Andy's wedding website should hopefully signal a return to that form:

A Thanksgiving Day wedding date does have a certain charm. Here's the full teaser for NBC's Halloween Thursday:

]]>
Gawker-5068696 Sat, 25 Oct 2008 08:50:00 EDT Alex Carnevale http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5068696&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Robert Downey Jr.: 'Fuck D.C. Comics' ]]> Robert-Downey-JrIron Man star Robert Downey Jr. will not be jumping from Marvel to D.C. anytime soon. In an interview with MovieHole.net to promote Tropic Thunder, the dashing actor fearlessly tore the ass off The Dark Knight and the comic empire behind it. "Didn't get it," he said, "still can't tell you what happened in the movie, what happened to the character and in the end they need him to be a bad guy. I'm like, 'I get it. This is so high brow and so fucking smart, I clearly need a college education to understand this movie.' You know what? Fuck DC comics. That's all I have to say and that's where I'm really coming from."

Downey also explained, "My whole thing is that that I saw The Dark Knight. I feel like I'm dumb because I feel like I don't get how many things that are so smart. It's like a Ferrari engine of storytelling and script writing and I'm like, 'That's not my idea of what I want to see in a movie.' I loved The Prestige but didn't understand The Dark Knight."

And don't bother warning him about possible reprisals for such loose talk. "You know, you're never too old to burn your bridges because I believe I have offended everyone. I think I've got a couple more. 'I'll burn that bridge when I come to it' is my favourite phrase I've ever coined." [via OhNoTheyDidn't]

]]>
Gawker-5037992 Sun, 17 Aug 2008 10:40:22 EDT ian spiegelman http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5037992&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ The Curse of <i>The Dark Knight</i> ]]> Remember Poltergeist, that 1982 horror film that was rumored to be plagued by a curse? What with the untimely deaths of two of its young stars, and reports of various odd occurrences on set. Can a movie be cursed? The Exorcist saw its fair share of mishaps, including injuries and the deaths of several crew members, as did Peter Berg's recent flop The Kingdom. And then there's Valkyrie. Well, it looks as though The Dark Knight, that Batman blockbuster mega-machine that's roiling in movie theatres currently, may be joining those ranks. Death and violence has surrounded three of its stars since the movie wrapped, Morgan Freeman's car accident last night being the most recent.

As we all know, Heath Ledger, who plays the Joker in the film, died in January from an accidental overdose of sleeping pills and other medication. It was a fluke accident that swiftly stopped his sure-to-be meteoric rise to fame in its tracks. Some claimed that Ledger had been in a dark place after wrapping the film, having gone too deep into his crazed, anarchist character. But was that really it? Isn't that what every actor does? Could it have been a curse?

Christian Bale, who plays the rough and (annoyingly) growling Caped Crusader recently had a row with his mother and sister, right before the film's London premiere. It led to an arrest on an assault charge, though Bale denies any real wrongdoing. He is said to have had a deeply troubled childhood, which could be the reason for his violent outburst. Or... could it be a hex?

And then, sadly, we get to Freeman's auto accident. The actor, who plays Lucius Fox in the film, was driving in Mississippi last night when his car skipped the road and rolled down an embankment. He's said to be in "serious condition." There have been no reports of alcohol or substance abuse or any of that unseemly (like this post) stuff, so maybe it was, in fact, the dark shadow force that bewitched and doomed him.

Also, a crewman died while filming one of the movie's epic action sequences. (But he wasn't famous, so, boo!, apparently.) The film's other actors have so far not reported any ghostly occurrences or freak accidents, and the producers are definitely happy and swimming in piles of money. But could this just be the deceiving prelude to the awfulness that's yet to befall them? Could they spiral into addiction, spurned by an overabundance of wealth and an unseen malevolent force? More importantly, what could have provoked this curse? Supposedly the Poltergeist jinx was brought about when real skeletons were used for the film's opening scene. Did some such malfeasance take place on the Dark Knight set? I mean, other than the oily, meaty presence of Eric Roberts.

]]>
Gawker-5032786 Mon, 04 Aug 2008 13:08:00 EDT Richard http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5032786&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ <i>The Dark Knight</i> is Too Violent for Wussy Brit Youths ]]> Dark Knight 18Our American kids love violence, especially when it comes in movie form. And the awesome violence of the PG-13 rated mega-super-ultra-blockbuster The Dark Knight is maybe the best movie violence ever! Loving, American parents appreciate that. But a wicked plot to deprive the little lads and lasses of funny little England of the magic of violence is underway. "The age rating given in Britain to the U.S. blockbuster movie "The Dark Knight" is inaccurate given its violence, a growing number of complaints contend. In addition to 70 complaints delivered to the British Board of Film Classification regarding the newest Batman film, Member of Parliament Keith Vaz criticized the government board for allowing young children to see it."

"The BBFC should realize there are scenes of gratuitous violence in 'The Dark Knight' to which I would certainly not take my 11-year-old daughter," Vaz said of the movie's 12A certificate, which means it is suitable for those age 12 and above. "It should be a 15 classification."

The board has acknowledged it came close to restricting the movie to those 15 and older. It also details the film's violent nature on its Web site.

The Times notes "Knight" received a PG-13 rating, while in Ireland and Scandinavia it was given a 15 rating in order to keep those 14 years and younger from seeing it without supervision. [UPI]
]]>
Gawker-5032525 Sun, 03 Aug 2008 17:21:31 EDT ian spiegelman http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5032525&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Movie Theatre Becomes Old Gay Porn Hut for Two Minutes ]]> [A photo of a Portland, OR second-run movie theatre changing its marquee from "Hancock" to "The Dark Knight." It's supposedly not a Photoshop thingie. Just like the Montauk Monster. One hundred percent real; image via Mr. Mark Lisanti]

]]>
Gawker-5031738 Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:31:00 EDT Richard http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5031738&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ How <i>The Dark Knight</i> Became the Biggest Movie In the History of Ever ]]> So it may have been marketed and hyped to a near-exhausting degree, but people were undaunted in seeing The Dark Knight in theaters this weekend, making it the highest-grossing first weekend for a movie ever. The record-setting number, $155.4m, is a bit padded, I'm sure, by increasingly high ticket prices and the record-breaking number of screens that the Batman epic flickered on, Friday-Sunday. But mostly I think we can chalk up the film's mega-success to just a perfect fever pitch of buzz; bordering on too loud, maybe, but tantalizingly so. Everyone wanted to see this movie to prove the hoopla right or wrong. (For my money it was right. Mostly.) So what exactly contributed to this insane zeitgeist? We'll take a look at three factors after the jump.

1) Quality's In
The damn thing got a lot of good reviews, plus had monumentally good word-of-mouth ever since Christian Bale flipped over that Joker card at the end of Batman Begins. Christopher Nolan is a smart director, with wholly entertaining, if moody and grim, sensibilities. Bryan Singer's two X-Men movies were similarly literate (well, for superhero movies) treats that thrilled fans and impressed critics (especially the second one.) Both of these directors had strong indie backgrounds before they made the leap to big budget fantasias, and it shows in nearly every frame. I mean, look at the execrable mess that was Brett Ratner's X-Men: The Last Stand. It may have barreled through the box offices successfully enough, but that particularly hacky hack's ruining of the trilogy will never be one for the books. It's already forgotten. People can recognize quality. Good is good.

2) The Joker & The Dead Gay Cowboy
Yes, Heath Ledger is in the movie. Yes he's wonderfully good in it. Yes he is also dead. And the Joker is one of America's favorite villains—funny, menacing, very macabre. Ledger's performance is a grim triumph, and his untimely death only emboldened his Joker's lurching creepiness. It was almost like watching a zombie. A terrifically talented actor zombie. And c'mon, who isn't curious to run out and see that on opening weekend? Whether your curiosity was morbid or artistic or some combination of both (which I suspect it was for most of us), it was a must-see performance, especially this first weekend. You just had to form your own opinion so you could herald it to friends and neighbors, didn't you? God knows I did!

3) Dark Indeed!
Frankly, people like a little dark meat once in a while. Look at the apocalyptic angst of Wall-E or the shaky-camera personal emotion of Hancock. People have been gravitating toward murkier fare this summer. And in the case of a comic book movie, darker is usually better because, well, nerds think it's cooler. Who the hell wanted to see Speed Racer this spring, with all its bright candy colors and clapping monkeys? Even the Hulk couldn't get past his inherent cheesiness to make much of a dent in the summer season. Really, in terms of chatter and impact, only Iron Man and TDK were bona fide smashes this season. Iron Man because of the way it mitigates its inherent darkness (gun running! the Middle East!) with stark (heh heh) humor, and TDK for how it embraced the darkness wholly and sort of fell into a pit with it (albeit a glorious, zippy pit). These are dark times, blah blah, etc etc.

OK, so that's that. Big movie. We'll see if it has a major Cloverfield-style second weekend drop-off, or if it will blunder on, crushing The X-Files and other sorry, misguided pieces of August detritus that lie in its path. Either way, can we stop talking about it now?

]]>
Gawker-5027256 Mon, 21 Jul 2008 10:54:00 EDT Richard http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5027256&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ A Demure Review ]]> More Batman! Our former leading man Choire Sicha reviewed The Dark Knight for Radar. And he liked it. A lot.

]]>
Gawker-5026808 Fri, 18 Jul 2008 15:43:00 EDT Richard http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5026808&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Dead Men Tell No Tales, But They Do Market Movies ]]> Just in case you've been hiking the Appalachian trail for the past seven months, there's this movie called The Dark Knight coming out today. It's a Batman movie, he of the cowl and the scowl, and it features his most nefarious foe, the Joker. That slithering baddie is played by Heath Ledger, an actor of beguiling good looks and talent who died—tragically, accidentally, hugely—in January. But his performance in this film lives on, and it's said to be the stuff of legend. Critics have been slamming their shoes on their desks for the past week, heralding it as "revelatory" and Brando-esque. The strength of this performance presented Warner Bros., months ago, with something of a conundrum. Should they continue plans to make his leering visage the movie's chief marketing image, or should they shy away from death, retreating to the simultaneously brighter and dimmer lights of Christian Bale and his boringer friends? Ultimately they chose to continue with their Joker-centric media deluge, and people got very angry! How dare they?! The man is dead, reduced to mere ashes floating in the Indian Ocean! It's immoral. And to that, we say bullshit.

The essential problem here is not one of taste or decorum, it's one of practicality and basic fucking humanity. People die. Sometimes, when people are lucky, it's at an advanced old age and one shuffles off surrounded by a wealth of memory and progeny's progeny, and it's merely like closing a book softly, having loved it to the last word. Other times it's quick and messy and ugly and brief, as was the case with Mr. Ledger. But to pussyfoot around, to be so scared to acknowledge death and dying, to wring our hands and say "oh no, what sacred and protected decency will we be violating if we acknowledge this fact" is stupid and obtuse. Frankly, I'm surprised Warner Bros. didn't market this movie as the chance to see Heath Ledger's Last, Greatest Performance. I mean, in essence they have, but in a respectably subtle way. I know that they stand to make a gargantuan sum of cheddar on this chamber piece of a superhero movie, but I think the most important thing is that Ledger's memory is being honored in the biggest, most laudatory way an actor could hope for. The wise and sexy Christian Bale (Santa Fe!) says of the whole foofaraw:

This is a celebration of what he did best - entertain people. Why would any actor not want that to be appreciated? I know he would have. The bottom line is it would be totally rude not to. Respect the man. This is what he did. This is what he wanted to do.

And I think that's the issue boiled down to its simplest and plainest truth. Here is a great thing that someone did once. It's not exploitation, in any way, to recognize that. Sure Warner Bros. may be coolly counting their millions, like business folks do, but they'll be grateful. They are people. Maybe they'll even applaud.

So hush up naysayers and Stevie Sensitivies. Why so serious indeed.

]]>
Gawker-5026674 Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:26:00 EDT Richard http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5026674&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Heath Ledger in <i>The Dark Knight</i>: 'Rave and Rage and Purge Acting' ]]> So finally the next Batman film, The Dark Knight, lurches into theaters this Friday. Anticipation is intense, as Batman Begins, Christopher Nolan's reboot of the franchise, was such a dark success. Of course, though, the real reason to see the film is Heath Ledger as uber villain The Joker. The buddingly talented actor died all too young in a SoHo apartment this past winter, leaving this as his last complete performance. So yeah, that's all we really care about when surveying the early reviews (we already know that Christian Bale will be gruff and brooding, Morgan Freeman sage and weary, Maggie Gyllenhaal unsurprisingly better than Katie Holmes, the film as a whole loud and jangly). So what do the critics say? Mostly, that he's fantastic. The increasingly-irrelevant Peter Travers, of Rolling Stone, calls the performance "mad-crazy-brilliant." The Davids Edelstein and Denby worry that Ledger stepped perhaps too far into the abyss to access the character. Basically, we're excited. Read a digest of the reviews after the jump.

  • "Nolan was wise enough, however, to give Ledger plenty of room to shine — albeit in the actor's indelibly perverse, twisted way. There's nothing cartoony about his Joker. Ledger wrested the role from previous performers Cesar Romero and Jack Nicholson and reinvented it completely." [AP]
  • "Ledger's performance is a beauty. His Joker has a slow cadence of speech, as if weighing words for maximum mischief and contempt. He moves languidly as if to savor his dark deeds, his head and body jerking at times from an overload of brain impulses." [THR]
  • "It's a stupendously creepy performance, wild but never over the top. He cuts a figure so dangerous that you wonder if Batman is up to the task—or if our hero himself will have to become as ruthless as his foe. When you're fighting an enemy who plays by no rules, do you have to abandon your own moral code to vanquish him?" [Newsweek]
  • "I can only speak superlatives of Ledger, who is mad-crazy-blazing brilliant as the Joker. Miles from Jack Nicholson's broadly funny take on the role in Tim Burton's 1989 Batman, Ledger takes the role to the shadows, where even what's comic is hardly a relief. No plastic mask for Ledger; his face is caked with moldy makeup that highlights the red scar of a grin, the grungy hair and the yellowing teeth of a hound fresh out of hell. To the clown prince of crime, a knife is preferable to a gun, the better to 'savor the moment.'" [Rolling Stone]
  • "How is Heath Ledger? My heart went out to him. He’s working so very hard to fill the void, to be doing something every second. It’s rave and rage and purge acting. This Joker is a straight-out psychopath—a Stephen King clown-demon with smudged greasepaint and yellow teeth and hair that appears to have never been washed. As written, the Joker is like a souped-up Andy Robinson in Dirty Harry (only this Harry won’t blow him away with a .44 Magnum), and Ledger revs it higher and higher. He bugs his eyes and licks compulsively at the gashes that extend his mouth. He tries on different voices. First he sounds like Cagney in White Heat, then slides into a prissy singsong like Al Franken’s Stuart Smalley, then throws in some fruity Brando flourishes and a dash of Hannibal Lecter. He’s lethal—fast with sharp objects—but apart from a gruesome bit with a pencil not terribly prankish. I couldn’t take my eyes off him, but in truth, I found the performance painful to watch. Scarier than what the Joker does to anyone onscreen is what Ledger must have been doing to himself—trying to find the center of a character without a dream of one." [NYMag]
  • "[Bale's is] a dogged but uninteresting performance, upstaged by the great Ledger, who shambles and slides into a room, bending his knees and twisting his neck and suddenly surging into someone’s face like a deep-sea creature coming up for air. Ledger has a fright wig of ragged hair; thick, running gobs of white makeup; scarlet lips; and dark-shadowed eyes. He’s part freaky clown, part Alice Cooper the morning after, and all actor. He’s mesmerizing in every scene. His voice is not sludgy and slow, as it was in 'Brokeback Mountain.' It’s a little higher and faster, but with odd, devastating pauses and saturnine shades of mockery. At times, I was reminded of Marlon Brando at his most feline and insinuating. When Ledger wields a knife, he is thoroughly terrifying (do not, despite the PG-13 rating, bring the children), and, as you’re watching him, you can’t help wondering—in a response that admittedly lies outside film criticism—how badly he messed himself up in order to play the role this way. His performance is a heroic, unsettling final act: this young actor looked into the abyss." [New Yorker]
  • ]]>
    Gawker-5024928 Mon, 14 Jul 2008 12:38:00 EDT Richard http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5024928&view=rss&microfeed=true
    <![CDATA[ <i>Batman</i> Plagiarizes Own 1989 Trailer ]]> Safariscreensnapz002-1This is creepy: The preview for the latest installment in the Batman movie franchise, the Dark Knight, looks incredibly similar scene-for-scene to the trailer for the original Batman 19 years ago. It's like the Dark Knight preview editor went frame by frame, trying to come as close to possible to duplicating the old trailer with new footage. Maybe as an homage. Or maybe there's a manual somewhere on how to make action movie trailers. Or maybe we've all been watching the same handful of Hollywood blockbusters over and over again, under different titles and with different combinations of stars, for decades now, and this side-by-side comparison video makes it all too hard to stay in denial any longer. Watch it after the jump. UPDATE: College Humor asked why these two previews were so similar — it appears to be because someone remixed the original movie to resemble the new trailer. So really, this is one trailer, plus one psuedo-trailer.

    See more funny videos at CollegeHumor

    [College Humor]

    ]]>
    Gawker-5007225 Tue, 29 Apr 2008 07:19:54 EDT Ryan Tate http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5007225&view=rss&microfeed=true
    <![CDATA[ Batman Did 9/11 ]]> Picture 96-1The Dark Knight, the latest outing for the revived Batman franchise, is out on July 18th. And the excitement is such that the release of a new poster, especially one as ominous as this, makes news. I saw the shape of the bat in the glow of the burning skyscraper—after a minute. But, at first, it looked like one of the Twin Towers, hit by an airplane.

    ]]>
    Gawker-5006916 Fri, 25 Apr 2008 13:12:35 EDT Nick Denton http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5006916&view=rss&microfeed=true