What is Digg?122 Comments
- cogitocogito, on 07/04/2008, -2/+62Note to reviewer: Please don't call a movie "flawless". It's sloppy, amateurish, and just shows you haven't looked that closely. It seems like it's a great movie, but come on.
- nnagflar, on 07/04/2008, -3/+46I'm excited for this movie too. But seriously, clean your pants.
- aftern9ne, on 07/04/2008, -1/+40Oh gag me. It may be a great movie, but it won't be a damn revolution.
- ganus, on 07/03/2008, -7/+30Reading this further confirmed that I am as giddy as a school girl in anticipation for July 18th.
- AgmLauncher, on 07/04/2008, -4/+26Comparing it to the Return of the King doesn't do a very good job of conveying the concept of "cinematic revolution" very well to me....
RotK was epic and fairly high quality, but in no way was it earth shattering or moving... - jimblackler, on 07/04/2008, -2/+22It's good because it's filmed in IMAX and has viral marketing? Welcome to .
- amanilaenvelope, on 07/04/2008, -5/+25Goddamn it. All this trailers and posters is killing me with excitement with the waiting for the release of TDK. Its making me act like a japanese school girl who just saw the newest kitty hugging robot.
yes, that excited. - elperegrino, on 07/04/2008, -0/+19i think he came.
- afx1, on 07/04/2008, -0/+17sir, please calm down
- wacomwacoff, on 07/04/2008, -0/+17Have you seen the movie? Then you can't really say, can you?
This guy's seen it. I'd take his opinion over someone who hasn't, thanks. - inactive, on 07/04/2008, -24/+37Overhype much?
- MOJIRA, on 07/04/2008, -0/+11the jungle?
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -2/+13Watch 2001: A Space Odyssey. THAT was a cinematic revolution.
This is just a really good film. - Gisterogue, on 07/04/2008, -0/+9One of the great things about working in a cinema is getting to see films early - before everyone else. Our cinema is the first fully digital multiplex in Europe, so we also get the advantage of each movie being in HD with top quality visuals and sound. Because of these things, our manager was invited to a meeting to watch this film, and a few other of the summer's unreleased movies, a week or two ago.
The reason I am telling you all this is because he was more excited about seeing WALL-E than The Dark Knight. I sure hope it lives up to the hype, because that will be fantastic, but with all this hype I can't see it doing badly at the box office if it turns out to be a tad mediocre anyway. Similar things happened with Cloverfield and more recently Hancock. Very mediocre films, but extremely popular.
If The Dark Knight lives up to the hype it will have achieved both, and this Digg post with it ;) - 801NvizioN, on 07/04/2008, -2/+10Or giddy for the schoolgirls at the movie.
- amercer, on 07/04/2008, -0/+7Wait... did anyone else detect sarcasm while reading this? Was it really only me? I think the writer is just trying to take a very subtle jab at all the people raving about the movie. The first paragraph in the outline even sounded a little sarcastic, and just look at the words in bold throughout the article. I thought it was pretty obvious he was just playing on other reviews.
- tomsentest, on 07/04/2008, -31/+38Give me a break - it's just another comic-book-to-movie project.
- lopla, on 07/04/2008, -1/+8funny, they opted not to use much cgi at all and it's a revolution. It just goes to show how bland big cgi effect ridden movies are. There's nothing like the real thing. It's amazing to see many going back to old school. I know folks getting out of digital photography and going back to film in droves, they got sick of their dslr's and images looking identical to everyone else's.
- norman619, on 07/04/2008, -1/+7The author's fanboy is showing.
- Jarasmen, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5Dark Knight hits theatres on 8th August in Poland. Global release dates my ass, not awesome. I just hope they'll have a copy in IMAX.
- solid12345, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5Until a hologram rachel dawes comes off the screen and gives me a handjob in my chair it isn't that revolutionary.
- Zuhsz, on 07/04/2008, -4/+9Why is everyone acting like this is the first uber-hyped movie ever? In case you're wondering, it's not.
- flangepiece, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5"Most comic book fans look for great action in superhero movies and that's it" - is he talking out of his arse or what?
- norman619, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4I hate that they changed so much from the actual story. Frank Miller's "The Dark Knight" is a great graphic novel. I'm looking forward to The Dark Knight Returns. If the stuff we say in I Am Legend is really a teaser it means this film is planned. Can't wait to see a senior citizen Batman kick the crap out of Superman. :-) In any case I learned a long time ago not to go to see movies like this expecting too much because they rarely live up to the hype.
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4What if...just what if... the movie comes out on the 18th and it suck. What if the movie industry is just hyping this movie up because of a tragic death of a depress actor. What if the movie comes out and it suck but people still thinks it is awesome because thinking otherwise would disrupt the herd. Kinda of like how most people say they listen to Nirvana because they think Curt was a genius, but really he was just depress and was loaded on drugs and booze. Don't get me wrong, I loved Batman Return, and the Batman Franchise, but has anybody thought about this? I agree about the comment on The Matrix. The Matrix was ground breaking. I just don't think another Batman movie will be a cinematic revolution. Just think about it guys. Really, another Batman movie, a cinematic revolution? Gullible.
- darienphoenix, on 07/04/2008, -2/+6"what happened to all the smart people? "
They just buried your post. - BobMysterioso, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4I think there are. The goth ones, they never seem giddy about anything.
- norman619, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4It's not just the media. People in general seem to turn almost anyone who dies to saints regardless of how ***** they really were in real life. But your point here is out of place here. The praise and hype surrounding the new Batman film has nothing to do with Ledger's death. The last Batman film was fantastic and this new one is promising to be as good and possibly even better than the lat one.
- vishzilla, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4With all this hype on the internet going around The Dark Knight, it shouldn't raise our hopes too much. If anything goes wrong down the line, we will be disappointed
- zer0nix, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4 as expensive as it is, cgi is still cheaper than building and shooting on real-life sets.
go ahead and digg me down. - DeFex, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4Holy cow! get over yourself.
- ntas, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3I must admit it looks good in the trailers i have seen so far...but a cinematic revolution? I doubt that...I have yet to see a ground breaking movie since I first saw the Matrix..well just have to wait till July 18 then
- Stketcher, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3Yeah..Started reading and stop when he said that its just "awesome"because of the Imax experience...There's no Imax in the country I live.
- sark666, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3Everybody gushes about IMAX, when I suspect the majority of you have never seen anything filmed in imax. And no, matrix or attack of the clones do not count. They were never shot in imax, they were upsampled to imax resolutions. As a matter of fact, to have a film called an imax film it, crazily enough, had to be shot in imax. Well now they have relaxed the standards and a film that's not even shot in imax can say it has 'the imax experience'.
See, the big thing about imax isn't the screen, it's the film it's shot on. The exposure is huge compared to regular film and you get much more detail. Now in defence of this film quoting wiki here:"The director used an IMAX camera to film six major action sequences, including the Joker's first appearance in the film.' I believe this is a first, finally people going to see traditional cinematic film converted to imax will actually see a portion of it in imax.
So probably about 15-20 minutes of these is truly imax, which is impressive in the sense that nothing they have tooted as 'imax' has actually been imax.
A couple of things against imax though for traditional films is film has a aspect ratio of 16:9 or wider whereas imax res is closer to 4:3. The result? You'll see a massive cropping of the film just like the days before getting movies in letterbox. Also, imax can only be 2 hours max, last I checked they hadn't got around this. For ex, attack of the clones in imax literally had twenty minutes cut from it.
Ok, enough rambling, it just bugs me when people gush about 'the imax experience' when the majority truly haven't experienced it. If you ever get the chance to see something truly shot in imax, go see it, the detail is astonishing.
And i just read wiki a little more, it seems the max running time of imax is now 2hrs 20 min, so less films will get the chop. And here's a last little quote on the transistion to upsampling of traditional films.
"Reviewers have generally praised the results of the DMR blowup process, which have superior visual and auditory impact to the same films projected in 35 mm. Many large format film industry professionals point out, however, that DMR blowups are not comparable to films created directly in the 70 mm 15 perf IMAX format. They note that the decline of Cinerama coincided roughly with the supersession of the original process with a simplified, reduced cost, technically inferior version, and view DMR with alarm. IMAX originally reserved the phrase "the IMAX experience" for true 70 mm productions, but now allows its use on DMR productions as well. However, IMAX DMR versions of commercial Hollywood films are generally popular with audiences, with many people choosing to pay more than standard admission to see the IMAX version." - korashime2001, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3Welcome to hyperbole.com
- LAngeDuFoyeur, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3The Dark Knight is revolutionary in it's ability to reveal poorly informed contributors to film websites. These people are acting like they've never seen a solid film before.
- joel8x, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3It made me think that the author is feeding the hype and attracting easy traffic to his website.
- norman619, on 07/04/2008, -2/+5Ever heard of ***** camcorder pirate copies?
- noots, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3CGI is now being treated as a tool for filming (like it should be), rather than a replacement.
- norman619, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3Remake? You serious? These new Batman films are not remakes. They totally ignore the previous films as if they did not exist much like what I like to do. The previous films were pretty bad and/or silly. They all had very weak stories and felt like they were for kids. I do hope you are being sarcastic because if not then you just gave us a great display of ignorance.
- warplayer, on 07/05/2008, -0/+2This made me think of Dieter and smile :)
NOW IS THE TIME ON SPROCKETS WHEN WE DANCE! - biggerapple3am, on 07/04/2008, -2/+4I wonder if there are schoolgirls out there that aren't giddy. That'd be weird.
- cavar, on 07/04/2008, -3/+5Agreed. Good as it may be, I think the director should be doing more serious, original stuff like "Memento".
- Acglaphotis, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2I suppose he was tired of saying "***** me".
- inactive, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2We got fun 'n' games
- frenchkick, on 07/04/2008, -5/+7okay...time to buy my tickets...
- BowieX, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Norman: wacom listed two additional reasons (beyond its critical reception) for why Wall·E is objectively a good film -
"WALL-E is getting some of the best reviews of the year, is a box office hit, and nearly universal love from viewers." So, the general public as a whole has responded very positively, and thus, objectively speaking, you're wrong in your assertion that most films out are better than Wall·E.
I would suggest, however much you are entitled to be disappointed by the movie, that you not judge a film by the reactions of a 5-year-old. Futhermore, the fact that you took him to see a movie that is arguably much more adult-oriented than most feature-length animations likewise suggests that you personally have a very tepid appreciation for nuance, something -- mind the pun -- littered throughout Wall·E. - norman619, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Zeronix:
Yes. I know this movie has nothing to do with the Frank Miller books. They took the name and changed most everything else. The I Am Legend teasers seem to point to a The Dark Knight Returns film since the had the Batman and Superman logos superimposed. Since they are going with "The Dark Knight" is stands to reason this is in the works. - marx2k, on 07/04/2008, -2/+4"Oh gag me"?
- Modulo, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Not disappointment!! AhhHH!!!!!! NOBODY WARNED ME ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR DISAPPOINTMENT!! YOU MONSTERS!!!!!
Live a little for chrissake. -
Show 51 - 100 of 125 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is