Log in

No account? Create an account
24 July 2008 @ 09:02 pm
grr arrgh and Dark Knight  
The LA Times had an article about Comic-con today. In general, fairly neutral and only resorting to bad stereotyping in a few places. So yay. 'bout time they caught on.

And they actually MENTION the BSG panel tomorrow as being one of the big draws. yay.

But. In the description it says that Ron, Tricia, James, Katee, and David Eick will be there, 'plus others.". *eyes narrow* No, you mean, "ONE" other, unless there are surprise guests. So, yeah, the only one they left off was Trucco from the known attendees. I'm... disgruntled on his behalf.

In other news, we went to see "Dark Knight" last night on a whim. We wanted to get into the IMAX version, but it was sold out UNTIL MONDAY! But my hubby was getting a bit teased at work since he's a huge Batman fan and he hadn't even seen it yet, so we went.


IOW, it features two elaborate chessmaster plots (which, yes, I LOVE A WHOLE LOT), a bunch of people being smart, betrayal, a tragic love story, etc. Sadly there is no David Bowie but there IS Bill Fichtner being awesome in about one minute of screentime as a bonus surprise. And there was Renee Montoya, sort of, my favorite Gotham Central character, which was a nice little nod.

Also, how much do I love Lucius Fox ("you want to blackmail a man who puts on a costume and beats people up at night?" lol). And Alfred? And how Bruce was going to out himself and was all guilty and it played like a tragedy? And then the real tragedy destroys everyone. Bruce loved her and the JOKER LIED but Bruce believed him. *sob*

Thematically awesome about how Batman slides down the slippery slope, dips his toe in the abyss, but fundamentally doesn't jump off. But Harvey fell right off (with some pushing). But then, he had farther to fall and so he gained more momentum on the way down. Batman had already lost the things that mattered most - this was just twisting the knife deeper.

The end was a bit of a waste of Two-Face as a villain of Batman's (But what else is new? See also Batman Forever), but I suppose he could come back. We saw the body but still, his body was clearly f-d up and I could buy him coming back, even though I doubt Nolan wants to go there.

Which led to the Batman Party Game on the way home-- Who's going to be the next installment's villain? Survey says... Hugo Strange, advising Gotham PD in their hunt. And Talia to avenge her father or a toned-down eco-terrorist Poison Ivy. I suspect we'll see a canon love interest come in, now that the non-canon one's gone, but it's too soon for Catwoman. I hope.

I liked Heath Ledger's performance, but I don't think it would've been quite so attention-grabbing if he'd lived. But from an ensemble cast the size of freakin Rhode Island, good performances all around. I wish we could've seen a bit more of Bruce - but then I always do, since those are always the parts I find the most resonant, especially when Bruce is with someone who KNOWS, Rachel and Alfred in particular (Lucius less so - there's still a bit of a mask there).

We're still going to catch it on IMAX. Hubby and I MET because we're both big Batman fans, so I have no objectivity whatsoever. *g*

Next up: X-Files! And Continuum!

It's a bit odd going to a movie more than once a year again.
Allison: Helo - Sad facefrolicndetour on July 25th, 2008 08:15 am (UTC)
Aw, poor Trucco! I could understand if there were a bunch of secondary cast going, but since he's the only one, why make the distinction and single him out? Bleh.
lizardbeth: Anders - no shirtlizardbeth_j on July 25th, 2008 08:30 am (UTC)
Exactly. I could totally get it if it just Tricia and Katee and Ron - but INCLUDING Callis and not Trucco was just ... weirdly dodgy. I can sort of justify it, in that Baltar's a bigger character from the beginning, but his name isn't one that people from outside BSG are going to know at all. And then having Trucco the ONLY one left off the list...

Maybe they were worried that if they put Trucco's name in there, all his ravening fan grrrl hordes would show up and terrorize the place once they found out the tickets were all gone... *g*
Tels: flying penguintelscha on July 25th, 2008 08:34 am (UTC)
very loose batman icon - its a penguin :P
Is very jealous. Wants to go see it but hubby will only take kids to movies and not me. Obv I need to retrain him but me thinks after 17 yrs its too late lol.
lizardbeth: Batmanlizardbeth_j on July 25th, 2008 05:15 pm (UTC)
lol, Penguin!

you guys don't all go the movies occasionally? not that this is a movie for any kid under 10 (it's violent and not always in a 'cartoonish' way), but if you get the chance, do try to see it on the big screen. Totally worth it!
graycardinalgraycardinal on July 25th, 2008 09:01 pm (UTC)
Next villain?

Hugo Strange makes thematic sense, but I think it's unlikely for commercial reasons -- he's a relatively little-known character outside the core fanbase, and this film franchise is drawing such a wide viewership that I think the producers will want a more bankable antagonist (yes, even though the first film sidestepped all the more widely known villains and more or less got away with it).

That said....

I think the bean counters may push very hard for Catwoman/Selina Kyle for two reasons -- because she's such an iconic Batverse character (and therefore a big box office draw), and because they'll figure they need a new love interest.

I very much doubt that she's the writers'/story-development team's first choice; my suspicion is that they're already thinking in terms of the third film as something in the nature of Batman's redemption -- in Gotham's eyes, at least, so that at the end of the trilogy they've more or less finished laying the groundwork for the canonical Batverse. In order for that to work, they'll really need to have Bats meet and vanquish a bigger head-on citywide threat than Selina realistically poses.

What we may well get as a compromise is Selina and Talia. Selina because Catwoman is bankable, Talia because revenge is indeed a solid motivator, and both together because one of the cleverest things they could do after giving us the Harvey/Rachel/Bruce triangle (with Rachel at the fulcrum) would be to flip the triangle idea inside out, and give us Selina/Bruce/Talia (with Bruce at the fulcrum).
lizardbeth: Batmanlizardbeth_j on July 25th, 2008 10:30 pm (UTC)
the idea of an inverted triangle is pretty cool. I'd love to see that, but I don't think it's too likely, since it's still a boys club 'verse.

My issue with Catwoman is that I don't see much way for Nolan to make her much different than she was in Batman Returns. He can tweak her origin, but other than that, it just seems like it would play pretty much the same. And so, yeah, there's no threat there, either to Bruce/Batman personally or to Gotham. And if the next one is set immediately afterward (the Hunt for Batman), I'm betting even the love interest part will be mostly absent (or one-sided), no matter who it is. It would be a bit unseemly for Bruce to be seriously falling for anybody outside of his cover, just a month or whatever after Rachel's death.

But, I concede, Catwoman is hugely popular, flop of a movie not withstanding, and odds are pretty good she could be in it. Even though I'd rather they go another way.

I love the idea of Talia since it would book-end the first movie. She could be a credible threat of Doom and Mayhem, having taken over the organization, AND she might know Bruce's identity, raising the stakes for him. Plus the whole Obsessive Stalker angle, if they go there.

Hubby and I also talked about the possibility of a low-gimmick Riddler, since he's both a Big Name villain and one that could be definitely re-interpreted from the previous film. But he turned basically into the this Joker, so I don't think I'd pick him if I were writing it. And the rest of the Rogues Gallery is pretty damn weird and hard to put in the Nolan-verse at all, 'gritty and realistic' as it's supposed to feel.

Or, that's a failure of imagination on my part. I guess we'll have to see... *g*