Käisin nüüd teistkordsel vaatamisel. Kahe nädalaga olid osad sisudetailid ebamäärsed või meelest läind, aga nüüd on kõik selge nagu vesi. Jokeri vestlus maffiabossidega ja ettepaneku tegemine läheb kindlalt mu all-time lemmikstseenidesse. Üldse kõik stseenid temaga olid supert. Ah mis ma ikka keerutan- ta üks lemmik karaktereid. Sisu, struktuur ja kõik sellega seoses oli teistkordsel vaatamisel ikka eriti kõva. Kõik jooksis kenasti.
See film on ikka kingitus. Niihää
esimest korda käisin emaga koos kinos. Ta tahtis ka näha et what's the fuss about
Pimeduse rüütel
Moderaator: Meeskond
Postitas Hülss » 27. Juuli 2008, 18:43
Ma kirjutasin oma arvamuse inglise keeles ühte teise foorumisse ja see võttis mul omajagu aega ja ma ei jõua rohkem enam trükkida, nii et postitan tema uuesti siia...
This turned out to be a lot longer than I expected, so I will understand completely if you stop reading before you reach the end or fall asleep. The reason for the length is because there's a lot to discuss here and I also bring up Batman Begins here and there for comparison. I explained everything as best as I could and it took me awhile to write this. If you haven't seen it yet, don't worry, there's no spoilers here. Enjoy.
The Dark Knight
a review by supernaut (Hülss)
A whole lotta fuss
I really can't remember the last time a movie created so much hype around itself. The Dark Knight is everywhere and it's not surprising. While the majority of critics and cinema goers have praised the film to high heavens, some have retained rationality. Such critics for example have received some pretty hostile emails from people most would call "the fans". At this point many have forgotten Batman Begins (2005), a movie that didn't try to overachieve, imo. It was not perfect either, for me at least. It dragged in some parts, but not the first time watching; some inconsistencies here and there that broke the immersion; the silly Batman voice, ect. In the end these were all trivial things and it was by far the best comic book adaption I had ever seen. The Dark Knight certainly improves the experience, but not to an extent where there's nothing left to improve. Batman Begins was a straightforward origin story, while The Dark Knight is as chaotic as it's main villain.
A film of epic proportions
Nolan's realistic take on an unrealistic story was a breath of fresh air in Batman Begins and set itself apart from all the rest in that genre. As in Batman Begins, the sequel presents two villains, one more larger than life. The Joker is enough to fill this movie on his own, but Two-Face was introduced most likely to set up a third movie. While the latter felt a bit rushed and excessive for this "overcrowded" long epic, it's hard to realize this complex story without Two-Face being introduced. They don't cancel eachother out, but it hurts the bigger picture imo. What I meant by overachieving earlier, is that there's just too much story crammed into this film, which is the reason for the 2 and a half hour length. The plot with it's numerous twists isn't that complex necessarily, but the pace can be a bit relentless at certain points. Since there's too much put into this one film, they didn't have the luxury of slowing things down and explain a few things in a calm and orderly fashion. In this regard I'd be interested to see a director's cut, cos the theatrical version was cut down to the point where there was nothing more left to skim. There's no way TDK can be any shorter with the amount of content being presented here. It's not the length that bothers me, but the amount of story I'm forced to digest with the given pacing. Two villains worked well for the first film, but in this case it feels more like Spiderman 3 (2007) with too many villains. This is the only reason I'm comparing the two, cos Spiderman 3 was a disastrous mess of filmmaking.
The team
With Christoper Nolan at the helm again there wasn't any doubt that this movie could disappoint. His track record is proof enough. The writing team didn't hold themselves back with this one, which makes it a very different experience compared to Batman Begins. Neither did the actors while giving their performances. The Dark Knight is accompanied by an all-star cast. Actors with their recurring characters and new additions to the cast, an ensemble of so much talent in one movie is a rare thing to happen. The Departed (2006) comes to mind immediately, which also had an amazing lineup. With new additions to the cast, in the form of Aaron Eckhart, Maggie Gyllenhaal and of course Heath Ledger, it must have been a dream job for Nolan. Christian Bale's character has his own moral dilemmas during the film, but it's hard to talk about anyone else besides The Joker, simply because Ledger's performance almost completely overshadows the main character. With that said, Bale is one of my favourite actors in recent years and I've never been disappointed by any of his movies. His character is more behind-the-scenes this time and Bruce/Batman realizes that he will be exactly what Gotham needs him to be in these chaotic times. An effective hitman that never gives up, he's the silent guardian of the city.
His love interest, Rachel Dawes, has a lot more interesting part this time with Harvey Dent completing the triangle. While Maggie Gyllenhaal was a far better choice than Katie Holmes, she doesn't look the part in this particular film. The character seems a bit frigid and "wandered off" somewhere. As an assistant D.A. and torn between two men, I guess that's understandable. Although she doesn't appear as someone that men would go after, but then again I can't think of anyone else that could better suit the role. Perhaps Maria Bello with the same hair color ?! Don't get me wrong, Gyllenhaal can be very attractive if need be, as she proved in Secretary (2002). Aaron Eckhart, who's a brilliant actor, brings his own flare to TDK. With a strong jaw like his, he looks perfect for the role of a district attorney. His character is a morally unbendable man that does everything in his power to bring the bad guys to justice, with the help of the Caped Crusader of course. Through tradic events Harvey Dent becomes easily corruptable and an alter ego is released from the unlikeliest places, turning his morals into a completely different direction. Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and Gary Oldman reprised their roles and all did a fantastic job once again. The rest of the cast is pretty decent, aside from Eric Roberts who just doesn't belong here.
A record breaker
Christopher Nolan and all others involved have managed to create a mainstream masterpiece. Here we see a perfect balance between marketing and filmmaking, which is ♥♥♥♥ing astounding to say the least. And the fact that this film is rated PG-13, when it's miles away from being a movie for kids, is no less important. Currently #1 on IMDB, 95% on RottenTomatoes and of course a box-office record breaker. While the opinions of others and how much money a movie makes means absolutely nothing to me, I gotta say that's an impressive feat. This is not a perfect film however, it's not the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ or watching the paint dry on the Mona Lisa. ...Ok, a bad joke. A movie that justifies a perfect score is something that has a longer effect on me and something that is timeless. At this point I can't rate it a 10/10 simply because I've only seen it once and then there're the flaws on top of that of course. The Shawshank Redemption (1994) is a perfect movie for me, cos I can't find any flaws in that film and it hasn't lost it's power, even after 14 years and seeing it god knows how many times. Christopher Nolan would probably tell you himself that TDK is not a perfect movie. Not because of modesty, but because in the end a director always feels like he/she could've done something a bit better.
Another feat for The Dark Knight is that it manages to rise above a simple comic book adaption. It completely breaks out of the bounds of a superhero movie in every sense possible. Without question this is the best film based on a comic book/graphic novel and also the perfect popcorn movie. But a perfect movie it is not, as the IMDB #1 spot might suggest. As I said, that accomplishment means nothing. What a movie means to you in the long run is what sets the classics apart from the rest. People usually rate movies based on their first impressions soon as they leave the theatre. And boy do they like to hand out those perfect tens. It's meaningless and unpractical, because when you start comparing these "perfect films" with eachother and with those timeless classics, you will see the error in your logic.
Heath Ledger
Heath Ledger is the one who stands above the rest, he's the driving force of the entire film and a force to be recond with. From the first trailer I was convinced he will deliver wholeheartedly. Ledger's performance is the one thing that no one can dispute, simply because it is flawless. This is the prime example of an actor giving his all. The last time I saw this happen was in There Will Be Blood (2007). It's no less than inspirational and without a doubt, Oscar worthy. A talented actor, who's performances were consistent since The Patriot, but what I most enjoyed from him before TDK was probably Candy (2006). Him playing The Joker, however, eclipses all of his previous work. The expression "going out with a bang" can't be used more appropriately. The heist scene, followed by the pencil trick set the perfect tone for both the character and to the whole movie. No matter what situation he was in, he was flawless. The downright bizarre and hysterical old lady walk he did while walking away from the hospital, was the high point for me as far as his body language goes. Facial expressions, eye movement, the tongue licking, the appearance, the voice and the body language were crafted to a point of perfection. Because of his dedication to the character and to the film, you don't see Heath Ledger and you don't think about Heath Ledger. If this doesn't get him a posthumous Oscar for Best Actor in a Supporting Role, then there will be hell to pay. I don't care how good the competition will be, this man deserves it and that's not because he's dead. Only thing I'm thinking at this point is who should accept the award on his behalf.
The soundtrack
Since there's a lot more going on in this film than in the previous one, you are completely engrossed in the characters and often you don't even pay much attention the music. But in no way has it a less important role this time. In fact it's the complete opposite. The music pulls you by the nerves without you even realizing it. It creates a level of tension that is absolutely crucial to complete The Joker as a menace. The Batman theme is still there from the previous film and when you recognize it, you can't help but smile. It's a powerful orchestration that enpowers the viewer, which was also the main reason why I loved the score of the first one. Thankfully both Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard returned to score the sequel, who did such an amazing job on Batman Begins. While the writers and Ledger's Joker created an intense atmosphere throughout the film, the soundtrack is the inseparable part of this experience. It's not as much in the foreground for easy listening, but it lurks in the back of your mind and pounds on your chest. And it brings everything together so seamlessly.
The visuals
I didn't have the opportunity to see this at an IMAX theatre (there's none in my country), so unfortunately I couldn't enjoy those particular scenes in all their full glory. In Batman Begins and especially The Dark Knight, Gotham finally looks like a real city with it's last vestiges of comic book design removed. It's the complete opposite of the old franchise and thank god for that. Gotham never needed to look like some circus town to tell it's story. Nolan's search for realism and perfection within the Batman universe has payed off completely. He focuses on the right things, unlike Joel Schumacher. It's a crime thriller, first and foremost, not a superhero movie. The visuals are normal, for the lack of a better word. Take Se7en (1995) for example, which imo is quite similar to the look of Batman Begins. Or The Departed and Inside Man (2006), these are what crime thrillers should look like. This is the only direction that Nolan could take, without the fear of being ridiculed like Schumacher. In both Batman Forever (1995) and Batman & Robin (1997), Gotham just looked obscene like some science fiction freak fest. Tim Burton had his own style and it worked, but Schumacher, well, he had a great opportunity and basicly ♥♥♥♥ed it up. You can't even compare The Dark Knight to other superhero movies, simply because it's in a different league. It's in the company of just great movies, not superhero movies like Spiderman 3 or Iron Man (2008), for example. The camera work, the special effects, the visual effects and everything else that was done by that fantastic team have made Gotham an exciting, intense and a beautiful background to a great crime story.
In other words
It's strange that The Joker doesn't call himself a schemer, when he does have a very elaborate plan to destroy the plans of others. Not a man with a plan, but despite that he plans a masterpiece. And it's a sadistic desire wanting to see that come to fruition, but in the end good must prevail and Batman reminds us of our moral code. There's so many themes placed into this movie that discussing all of them would make this review even longer, so I have to wrap this up at some point. The Dark Knight, at the least, is thought-provoking and that's more you can say about other comic book adaptions. Only other example that comes to mind is V For Vendetta (2005), which battles with similar themes. While the ending of The Dark Knight leaves us wanting for more and with questions unanswered, it's hard to imagine it in any other way without first knowing what plans they have for the third movie. The ending certainly feels like there will be more to come. And when it does come, perhaps the ending of TDK will feel more appropriate than it does at this point. If the end justifies the means, then I'm all for it. Not saying it was bad necessarily, but it did feel rushed. Despite that it's a beautifully crafted film with superb writing by the Nolan brothers. Under the direction of one of the most talented directors in recent years comes together a near perfect cast, each of them bringing their own level of expertise. Fantastic performances by all involved and the best of the lot is obviously Heath Ledger. In both visuals, sound and music it is an incredibly intense experience. Not only one of the best movies of the last decade, but a perfect blockbuster popcorn movie that breaks out of the bounds of a conventional comic book adaption. Now there's only left to wait for the DVD release and see how many Oscar nominations will The Dark Knight receive next year. In the meantime, go buy the soundtrack, immediately.
Rating: 9/10
Ootan kriitikat oma inglise keele kohta ja julma ausust.
This turned out to be a lot longer than I expected, so I will understand completely if you stop reading before you reach the end or fall asleep. The reason for the length is because there's a lot to discuss here and I also bring up Batman Begins here and there for comparison. I explained everything as best as I could and it took me awhile to write this. If you haven't seen it yet, don't worry, there's no spoilers here. Enjoy.
The Dark Knight
a review by supernaut (Hülss)
A whole lotta fuss
I really can't remember the last time a movie created so much hype around itself. The Dark Knight is everywhere and it's not surprising. While the majority of critics and cinema goers have praised the film to high heavens, some have retained rationality. Such critics for example have received some pretty hostile emails from people most would call "the fans". At this point many have forgotten Batman Begins (2005), a movie that didn't try to overachieve, imo. It was not perfect either, for me at least. It dragged in some parts, but not the first time watching; some inconsistencies here and there that broke the immersion; the silly Batman voice, ect. In the end these were all trivial things and it was by far the best comic book adaption I had ever seen. The Dark Knight certainly improves the experience, but not to an extent where there's nothing left to improve. Batman Begins was a straightforward origin story, while The Dark Knight is as chaotic as it's main villain.
A film of epic proportions
Nolan's realistic take on an unrealistic story was a breath of fresh air in Batman Begins and set itself apart from all the rest in that genre. As in Batman Begins, the sequel presents two villains, one more larger than life. The Joker is enough to fill this movie on his own, but Two-Face was introduced most likely to set up a third movie. While the latter felt a bit rushed and excessive for this "overcrowded" long epic, it's hard to realize this complex story without Two-Face being introduced. They don't cancel eachother out, but it hurts the bigger picture imo. What I meant by overachieving earlier, is that there's just too much story crammed into this film, which is the reason for the 2 and a half hour length. The plot with it's numerous twists isn't that complex necessarily, but the pace can be a bit relentless at certain points. Since there's too much put into this one film, they didn't have the luxury of slowing things down and explain a few things in a calm and orderly fashion. In this regard I'd be interested to see a director's cut, cos the theatrical version was cut down to the point where there was nothing more left to skim. There's no way TDK can be any shorter with the amount of content being presented here. It's not the length that bothers me, but the amount of story I'm forced to digest with the given pacing. Two villains worked well for the first film, but in this case it feels more like Spiderman 3 (2007) with too many villains. This is the only reason I'm comparing the two, cos Spiderman 3 was a disastrous mess of filmmaking.
The team
With Christoper Nolan at the helm again there wasn't any doubt that this movie could disappoint. His track record is proof enough. The writing team didn't hold themselves back with this one, which makes it a very different experience compared to Batman Begins. Neither did the actors while giving their performances. The Dark Knight is accompanied by an all-star cast. Actors with their recurring characters and new additions to the cast, an ensemble of so much talent in one movie is a rare thing to happen. The Departed (2006) comes to mind immediately, which also had an amazing lineup. With new additions to the cast, in the form of Aaron Eckhart, Maggie Gyllenhaal and of course Heath Ledger, it must have been a dream job for Nolan. Christian Bale's character has his own moral dilemmas during the film, but it's hard to talk about anyone else besides The Joker, simply because Ledger's performance almost completely overshadows the main character. With that said, Bale is one of my favourite actors in recent years and I've never been disappointed by any of his movies. His character is more behind-the-scenes this time and Bruce/Batman realizes that he will be exactly what Gotham needs him to be in these chaotic times. An effective hitman that never gives up, he's the silent guardian of the city.
His love interest, Rachel Dawes, has a lot more interesting part this time with Harvey Dent completing the triangle. While Maggie Gyllenhaal was a far better choice than Katie Holmes, she doesn't look the part in this particular film. The character seems a bit frigid and "wandered off" somewhere. As an assistant D.A. and torn between two men, I guess that's understandable. Although she doesn't appear as someone that men would go after, but then again I can't think of anyone else that could better suit the role. Perhaps Maria Bello with the same hair color ?! Don't get me wrong, Gyllenhaal can be very attractive if need be, as she proved in Secretary (2002). Aaron Eckhart, who's a brilliant actor, brings his own flare to TDK. With a strong jaw like his, he looks perfect for the role of a district attorney. His character is a morally unbendable man that does everything in his power to bring the bad guys to justice, with the help of the Caped Crusader of course. Through tradic events Harvey Dent becomes easily corruptable and an alter ego is released from the unlikeliest places, turning his morals into a completely different direction. Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and Gary Oldman reprised their roles and all did a fantastic job once again. The rest of the cast is pretty decent, aside from Eric Roberts who just doesn't belong here.
A record breaker
Christopher Nolan and all others involved have managed to create a mainstream masterpiece. Here we see a perfect balance between marketing and filmmaking, which is ♥♥♥♥ing astounding to say the least. And the fact that this film is rated PG-13, when it's miles away from being a movie for kids, is no less important. Currently #1 on IMDB, 95% on RottenTomatoes and of course a box-office record breaker. While the opinions of others and how much money a movie makes means absolutely nothing to me, I gotta say that's an impressive feat. This is not a perfect film however, it's not the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ or watching the paint dry on the Mona Lisa. ...Ok, a bad joke. A movie that justifies a perfect score is something that has a longer effect on me and something that is timeless. At this point I can't rate it a 10/10 simply because I've only seen it once and then there're the flaws on top of that of course. The Shawshank Redemption (1994) is a perfect movie for me, cos I can't find any flaws in that film and it hasn't lost it's power, even after 14 years and seeing it god knows how many times. Christopher Nolan would probably tell you himself that TDK is not a perfect movie. Not because of modesty, but because in the end a director always feels like he/she could've done something a bit better.
Another feat for The Dark Knight is that it manages to rise above a simple comic book adaption. It completely breaks out of the bounds of a superhero movie in every sense possible. Without question this is the best film based on a comic book/graphic novel and also the perfect popcorn movie. But a perfect movie it is not, as the IMDB #1 spot might suggest. As I said, that accomplishment means nothing. What a movie means to you in the long run is what sets the classics apart from the rest. People usually rate movies based on their first impressions soon as they leave the theatre. And boy do they like to hand out those perfect tens. It's meaningless and unpractical, because when you start comparing these "perfect films" with eachother and with those timeless classics, you will see the error in your logic.
Heath Ledger
Heath Ledger is the one who stands above the rest, he's the driving force of the entire film and a force to be recond with. From the first trailer I was convinced he will deliver wholeheartedly. Ledger's performance is the one thing that no one can dispute, simply because it is flawless. This is the prime example of an actor giving his all. The last time I saw this happen was in There Will Be Blood (2007). It's no less than inspirational and without a doubt, Oscar worthy. A talented actor, who's performances were consistent since The Patriot, but what I most enjoyed from him before TDK was probably Candy (2006). Him playing The Joker, however, eclipses all of his previous work. The expression "going out with a bang" can't be used more appropriately. The heist scene, followed by the pencil trick set the perfect tone for both the character and to the whole movie. No matter what situation he was in, he was flawless. The downright bizarre and hysterical old lady walk he did while walking away from the hospital, was the high point for me as far as his body language goes. Facial expressions, eye movement, the tongue licking, the appearance, the voice and the body language were crafted to a point of perfection. Because of his dedication to the character and to the film, you don't see Heath Ledger and you don't think about Heath Ledger. If this doesn't get him a posthumous Oscar for Best Actor in a Supporting Role, then there will be hell to pay. I don't care how good the competition will be, this man deserves it and that's not because he's dead. Only thing I'm thinking at this point is who should accept the award on his behalf.
The soundtrack
Since there's a lot more going on in this film than in the previous one, you are completely engrossed in the characters and often you don't even pay much attention the music. But in no way has it a less important role this time. In fact it's the complete opposite. The music pulls you by the nerves without you even realizing it. It creates a level of tension that is absolutely crucial to complete The Joker as a menace. The Batman theme is still there from the previous film and when you recognize it, you can't help but smile. It's a powerful orchestration that enpowers the viewer, which was also the main reason why I loved the score of the first one. Thankfully both Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard returned to score the sequel, who did such an amazing job on Batman Begins. While the writers and Ledger's Joker created an intense atmosphere throughout the film, the soundtrack is the inseparable part of this experience. It's not as much in the foreground for easy listening, but it lurks in the back of your mind and pounds on your chest. And it brings everything together so seamlessly.
The visuals
I didn't have the opportunity to see this at an IMAX theatre (there's none in my country), so unfortunately I couldn't enjoy those particular scenes in all their full glory. In Batman Begins and especially The Dark Knight, Gotham finally looks like a real city with it's last vestiges of comic book design removed. It's the complete opposite of the old franchise and thank god for that. Gotham never needed to look like some circus town to tell it's story. Nolan's search for realism and perfection within the Batman universe has payed off completely. He focuses on the right things, unlike Joel Schumacher. It's a crime thriller, first and foremost, not a superhero movie. The visuals are normal, for the lack of a better word. Take Se7en (1995) for example, which imo is quite similar to the look of Batman Begins. Or The Departed and Inside Man (2006), these are what crime thrillers should look like. This is the only direction that Nolan could take, without the fear of being ridiculed like Schumacher. In both Batman Forever (1995) and Batman & Robin (1997), Gotham just looked obscene like some science fiction freak fest. Tim Burton had his own style and it worked, but Schumacher, well, he had a great opportunity and basicly ♥♥♥♥ed it up. You can't even compare The Dark Knight to other superhero movies, simply because it's in a different league. It's in the company of just great movies, not superhero movies like Spiderman 3 or Iron Man (2008), for example. The camera work, the special effects, the visual effects and everything else that was done by that fantastic team have made Gotham an exciting, intense and a beautiful background to a great crime story.
In other words
It's strange that The Joker doesn't call himself a schemer, when he does have a very elaborate plan to destroy the plans of others. Not a man with a plan, but despite that he plans a masterpiece. And it's a sadistic desire wanting to see that come to fruition, but in the end good must prevail and Batman reminds us of our moral code. There's so many themes placed into this movie that discussing all of them would make this review even longer, so I have to wrap this up at some point. The Dark Knight, at the least, is thought-provoking and that's more you can say about other comic book adaptions. Only other example that comes to mind is V For Vendetta (2005), which battles with similar themes. While the ending of The Dark Knight leaves us wanting for more and with questions unanswered, it's hard to imagine it in any other way without first knowing what plans they have for the third movie. The ending certainly feels like there will be more to come. And when it does come, perhaps the ending of TDK will feel more appropriate than it does at this point. If the end justifies the means, then I'm all for it. Not saying it was bad necessarily, but it did feel rushed. Despite that it's a beautifully crafted film with superb writing by the Nolan brothers. Under the direction of one of the most talented directors in recent years comes together a near perfect cast, each of them bringing their own level of expertise. Fantastic performances by all involved and the best of the lot is obviously Heath Ledger. In both visuals, sound and music it is an incredibly intense experience. Not only one of the best movies of the last decade, but a perfect blockbuster popcorn movie that breaks out of the bounds of a conventional comic book adaption. Now there's only left to wait for the DVD release and see how many Oscar nominations will The Dark Knight receive next year. In the meantime, go buy the soundtrack, immediately.
Rating: 9/10
Ootan kriitikat oma inglise keele kohta ja julma ausust.
-
Hülss - Ristiisa
- Postitusi: 1279
- Liitunud: 14. Jaanuar 2007, 16:49
- Asukoht: Tallinn
Postitas Hülss » 27. Juuli 2008, 19:32
Soprano kirjutas:Ma ei tea, kui kaua seda lugesin, aga lugesin huviga lõpuni. Inglise keel on perfecto! OMG. Kaua sa seda kirjutasid?
Kuulasin just täna soundtracki. Võimas nagu filmiski.
Ma jamasin sellega kaks päeva ja kui valmis sain kadus igasugune huvi seda sama teksti eesti keeles seletada.
-
Hülss - Ristiisa
- Postitusi: 1279
- Liitunud: 14. Jaanuar 2007, 16:49
- Asukoht: Tallinn
Postitas Ralf » 27. Juuli 2008, 19:35
Kidd kirjutas:Mulle Batmani hääl meeldis, mis oli ka loogiline, et tuleb häält moonutada, vastasel juhul oleks jäänud nagu loll efekt, et Batman räägib Mr Wayne häälega ja keegi nagu ära ei tunne (umbes nagu Zorro, prillid ees ja kohe nii tundmatu)
Kui Clark Kent võtab prillid eest ning ajab kostüümi selga ja tema enda kolleegid ei taipa, et tegu on Clarkiga, siis miks on Bruce'il vaja vähihaige häält, et enda identiteeti saladuses hoida?
icheckmovies / imdb / last.fm / rateyourmusic / quora
-
Ralf - love <3
- Postitusi: 13749
- Liitunud: 06. Mai 2006, 14:57
- Asukoht: Sinu voodialune (väga tolmune *köh*)
Postitas bpuhnja » 27. Juuli 2008, 19:50
Ralf kirjutas:Kidd kirjutas:Mulle Batmani hääl meeldis, mis oli ka loogiline, et tuleb häält moonutada, vastasel juhul oleks jäänud nagu loll efekt, et Batman räägib Mr Wayne häälega ja keegi nagu ära ei tunne (umbes nagu Zorro, prillid ees ja kohe nii tundmatu
Kui Clark Kent võtab prillid eest ning ajab kostüümi selga ja tema enda kolleegid ei taipa, et tegu on Clarkiga, siis miks on Bruce'il vaja vähihaige häält, et enda identiteeti saladuses hoida?
Sest Batman (ja Iron Man) pole selline nagu kõik need geneetiliselt muundatud superkangelased. Üks Batmani eeliseid ongi see, et ta on täpselt sama haavatav nagu iga teine inimene. Pole mingisuguseid ülivõimeid jne.
-
bpuhnja - Batman alustab
- Postitusi: 94
- Liitunud: 16. Juuli 2007, 23:27
Postitas Ralf » 27. Juuli 2008, 19:57
bpuhnja kirjutas:Pole mingisuguseid ülivõimeid jne.
Selle kaubiku külje rebis käega küll lõhki.
Ärge muretsege, ega ma ette heida, ma lihtsalt väidan, et nn Batvoice'iga pingutati natuke üle.
icheckmovies / imdb / last.fm / rateyourmusic / quora
-
Ralf - love <3
- Postitusi: 13749
- Liitunud: 06. Mai 2006, 14:57
- Asukoht: Sinu voodialune (väga tolmune *köh*)
Postitas -DS- » 27. Juuli 2008, 20:23
Hülss kirjutas:Soprano kirjutas:Ma ei tea, kui kaua seda lugesin, aga lugesin huviga lõpuni. Inglise keel on perfecto! OMG. Kaua sa seda kirjutasid?
Kuulasin just täna soundtracki. Võimas nagu filmiski.
Ma jamasin sellega kaks päeva ja kui valmis sain kadus igasugune huvi seda sama teksti eesti keeles seletada.
Inglise keel pole paha, kuigi mõned kohad despite-ga jäid pinnuks silma. Lisaks alustasid sa mõnes kohas lauseid vale sõnaga ja mõned mõtted olid veidi segased.
- -DS-
- Raevunud härg
- Postitusi: 107
- Liitunud: 19. Jaanuar 2007, 19:06
Postitas Hülss » 27. Juuli 2008, 20:40
-DS- kirjutas:Inglise keel pole paha, kuigi mõned kohad despite-ga jäid pinnuks silma. Lisaks alustasid sa mõnes kohas lauseid vale sõnaga ja mõned mõtted olid veidi segased.
Päris ausalt öelda ei jäänud ma ise ka rahule, aga lihtsalt villand sai lõpuks, sest 6-7 tundi sai jamatud sellega. Kvaliteet on mul jah tihti hüplik: lause ehitus, korduvad sõnad, selge ja loetav mõte. Jutt peab ilusasti voolama, mille poole vaja kindlasti püüelda.
Arenguruumi on veel hulgi, kahtlemata.
-
Hülss - Ristiisa
- Postitusi: 1279
- Liitunud: 14. Jaanuar 2007, 16:49
- Asukoht: Tallinn
Postitas Hülss » 27. Juuli 2008, 21:01
Amazonis on ka vingeid särke, peab vast midagi tellima, siis näen lõpuks lahe välja. Musta t-särki aga ei telliks, sest neid on mul juba liiga palju. 
http://www.amazon.com/s/qid=1217181510/ ... %3A1040658
http://www.amazon.com/s/qid=1217181510/ ... %3A1040658
-
Hülss - Ristiisa
- Postitusi: 1279
- Liitunud: 14. Jaanuar 2007, 16:49
- Asukoht: Tallinn
Postitas Ralf » 27. Juuli 2008, 21:38
Ma tahan järgmisesse Nolani Batmani filmi Deadshot'i.
Üks realistlikumaid kurikaelu ühesõnaga.
Ma küll ei taha, et Schumacheri või Burtoni filmides nähtud pahalasi uuesti kasutatakse. Uut verd on vaja.
Üks realistlikumaid kurikaelu ühesõnaga.
Ma küll ei taha, et Schumacheri või Burtoni filmides nähtud pahalasi uuesti kasutatakse. Uut verd on vaja.
icheckmovies / imdb / last.fm / rateyourmusic / quora
-
Ralf - love <3
- Postitusi: 13749
- Liitunud: 06. Mai 2006, 14:57
- Asukoht: Sinu voodialune (väga tolmune *köh*)
Postitas bpuhnja » 27. Juuli 2008, 21:43
Keda ma näha EI taha on Mister Freeze ja Poison Ivy.
Deadshot sarnaneb DareDevil'i filmis oleva 'Bulls-Eye" tegelaskujuga.
The Riddler oleks huvitav valik.
Samas ei oleks minul isiklikult mitte midagi täiesti uudse (st pole koomiksis esinenud) pahalase vastu.
Deadshot sarnaneb DareDevil'i filmis oleva 'Bulls-Eye" tegelaskujuga.
The Riddler oleks huvitav valik.
Samas ei oleks minul isiklikult mitte midagi täiesti uudse (st pole koomiksis esinenud) pahalase vastu.
-
bpuhnja - Batman alustab
- Postitusi: 94
- Liitunud: 16. Juuli 2007, 23:27
-
- Statistika
-
Kes on foorumil
Kasutajad foorumit lugemas: Registreeritud kasutajaid pole ja 56 külalist
