8 Hiscock Road, Melbourne Superthread

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I ought to take the Axver approach next time I turn up and everyone talks about DI and nothing else.

Except, you know, it's quite possible for us to talk about something else at the same time.

Yeah, we did have multiple conversation strands going, and then all this TDK talk just overwhelmed the thread. Talk that we've had a million times before. It was completely disinteresting, so hell, I posted something I find interesting that you lot find disinteresting. Deal. And PFan? You hypocrite. That's all I have to say.
 
Ok since maybe I've been egging on the TDK talk, it would be best if I went to bed before this got out of hand :wave:
 
You haven't lived until you've been to a midnight showing of The Rocky Horror Picture Show. Nothing like getting pelted with rice, water, confetti, toilet paper, toast, and playing cards during a movie. Not to mention doing the Time Warp in a packed theater.


Also:

boner_2.gif
 
I've yet to see a point in burying Heath Ledger posthumously because we're talking about his performance in a film which you haven't seen. And you getting pissed about us talking a film you call a "fad" which you haven't seen.

It is a fad film. It could be fucking amazing, but it's still a fad. Let's be honest, The Joshua Tree was a bit of a fad album in 1987. Doesn't mean it wasn't a classic.
 
God I was starting to get the impression that everyone hated Nicholson's Joker. I'm relieved now :lol:

I mean I find that Heath's Joker wasn't as dark as everybody was going to make him out to be and he was still quite funny like he was supposed to be as well.

Then the Nicholson Joker was mean, and funny. Not so Dark though, so I think they each brought something to the table :shrug:

Cartoon Joker...now he was pretty awesome as well :wink:

I thought Ledger's Joker was incredibly dark and frightening. Nicholson's was awesome, too, for the reasons you mentioned, but more of a clown than a homicidal menace, you know?

A friend of mine posted this review of that actually, and I want to share it with you guys:

So first thing I want to say is that this was a good movie.
But that is about it. It had some awesome themes to it, and showed how far, and how quick, a person can become evil. But who learned anything? The entire theater laughed like crazy when the joker made the pencil "disappear". This movie represented evil perfectly, and everybody enjoyed every second of it...
And honestly who actually wanted to watch Batman? I spent the greater portion of the 150 minutes waiting for the joker scenes, and for Harvey to become Two-Face.
We got our fill of the 'New' Batman a couple years ago, this was all about the joker.
The joker is not considered to be insane, he is thought to be extremely in touch with human nature, but he sees only the worst that humans are capable of.
And for anybody that thinks that Jack did a poor job at depicting the Joker, then they need to go and read some comics, because the joker is a balance of Ledger's and Jack's interpretation. He is supposed to be a person that in one instance he is completely harmless and just wants to have fun, but when you turn you back he goes around blowing up 12 year olds. I left the theatre a little unsatisfied, but would see it again. (Only because Heath gives me a boner.)

I don't agree with all of it, but I think he makes some very valid points.
 
Yeah, we did have multiple conversation strands going, and then all this TDK talk just overwhelmed the thread. Talk that we've had a million times before. It was completely disinteresting, so hell, I posted something I find interesting that you lot find disinteresting. Deal. And PFan? You hypocrite. That's all I have to say.

What was stopping us from carrying on with the other conversations? Seriously.
 
It is a fad film. It could be fucking amazing, but it's still a fad. Let's be honest, The Joshua Tree was a bit of a fad album in 1987. Doesn't mean it wasn't a classic.

My question is...why then have you been using the term "fad" in such a condescending manner; as if its popularity somehow undermines the film's quality?
 
It is a fad film. It could be fucking amazing, but it's still a fad. Let's be honest, The Joshua Tree was a bit of a fad album in 1987. Doesn't mean it wasn't a classic.

You're absolutely saying it as a detraction. Otherwise, you wouldn't keep saying it.
 
I'm going to bed now (at 7:30am) good night Superthread

And if anyone who has any interest in the Artist League still hasn't nominated any bands yet you should really do so:wink:
 
My question is...why then have you been using the term "fad" in such a condescending manner; as if its popularity somehow undermines the film's quality?

... I haven't. The hype is just excessive and rather than making me want to see the movie more, it makes me want to see it less.
 
Fuck this. I'm out for the night.

And the next couple of days, as a matter of fact.
 
I thought Ledger's Joker was incredibly dark and frightening. Nicholson's was awesome, too, for the reasons you mentioned, but more of a clown than a homicidal menace, you know?

A friend of mine posted this review of that actually, and I want to share it with you guys:



I don't agree with all of it, but I think he makes some very valid points.

one more post:

Exactly, in regards to the differences between the two jokers. I think they both set out the goals of what the directors wanted their film to be. Obviously a Tim Burton film wants to be a little lighter. Nolan wants his films darker. You get what the director wants you to see.


And I think your friend hit the points I've been trying to get myself to type. I wanted a lot more Dent/Joker, and a lot less Batman (even less Rachel. ...UGH Maggie Gyllenhaal)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom