She wanted Bruce Wayne to suffer, so she drew it out to cause as much suffering to the city/Bruce as possible. It was as much trying to destroy the city as destroy Bruce's spirit.
Imagine if Ledger hadn't died and the Joker had been the villain rather than Bane... This would rival the Godfather trilogy. As it stands I see it on Lord Of The Rings level. And really? If the bomb thing was stupid, the Joker's blow up the boats after midnight idea was stupid. Why not blow them up right away? Who cares about psychological suffering?
And that aspect is remarkably stupid.
Imagine if Ledger hadn't died and the Joker had been the villain rather than Bane... This would rival the Godfather trilogy. As it stands I see it on Lord Of The Rings level. And really? If the bomb thing was stupid, the Joker's blow up the boats after midnight idea was stupid. Why not blow them up right away? Who cares about psychological suffering?
My point is that people are being willfully dense when saying that the bomb plot is stupid. If you accept what the Joker did as valid then the bomb thing follows.
I'm with you Perth. It's just the psychological aspect of it is important. The Joker was trying to show, with the people on each boat being able to blow each other up or face death themselves, that everyone was "as ugly as" him. That when put in the situation they would kill out of necessity.
The Dark Knight is genius, for sure.
Imagine if Ledger hadn't died and the Joker had been the villain rather than Bane... This would rival the Godfather trilogy. As it stands I see it on Lord Of The Rings level. And really? If the bomb thing was stupid, the Joker's blow up the boats after midnight idea was stupid. Why not blow them up right away? Who cares about psychological suffering?
Wait a minute you guys who are fans of lightsabers, magical rings, ****ing ewoks taking down an empire, Indy closing his eyes to avoid his face meltinf from the arc, yet see Bane holding a city hostage with a nuke and that's is just ridiculous.
Movies have a set of rules, as long as those rules make sense within that movies universe than it works. That is why Avengers works and Fantastic Four does not. TDKR is a conclusion to the Dark Knight trilogy. As a stand alone it is flawed, as a bookend it is fantastic. Yes it is an par with Star Wars (the original, not the crap that is out now), LOTR (though I am not a fan), Godfather, and others you can think of.
To those that compare it to Transformers. Lets see Rotten Tomatoes critic meter
Transformers 57%
Tranformers: Revenge of the fallen 20%
Transformers: Dark of the Moon 35%
Batman Begins 85%
The Dark Knight 94%
The Dark Knight Rises 87%
Yeah that is comparable
Yeah but superman would kick batmans *** so it doesn't matter![]()
Superman is boring.
Yeah but superman would kick batmans *** so it doesn't matter![]()
Yeah but superman would kick batmans *** so it doesn't matter![]()
'89 Batman is still the best.
![]()
Deal with it.
Heath Ledger's joker kicked Jack Nicholson's joker's ***.
Someone should have told the writers at DC
![]()
My biggest gripe with the movie was that several times in TDKR Batman states that the point of the mask is that anyone could be him. He wanted to inspire citizens of Gotham to take justice into their own hands..
Except, in TDK, Batman gets pissed off at the copy cats at the beginning of the story and screams "I DON'T NEED HELP!" "I'M NOT WEARING HOCKEY PANTS," etc.
Am I misunderstanding what Batman is talking about or is this a legitimate contradiction between the two movies?
My biggest gripe with the movie was that several times in TDKR Batman states that the point of the mask is that anyone could be him. He wanted to inspire citizens of Gotham to take justice into their own hands..
Except, in TDK, Batman gets pissed off at the copy cats at the beginning of the story and screams "I DON'T NEED HELP!" "I'M NOT WEARING HOCKEY PANTS," etc.
Am I misunderstanding what Batman is talking about or is this a legitimate contradiction between the two movies?