criterionforum.org

Posted: **Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:24 pm**

Now I'm worried about Nicole after playing Mrs. Coulter.

Posted: **Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:35 pm**

Anthony Hopkins seems to have a habit of going insane while doing shakespeare. Usually while smiling to the press and saying acting is the easiest job in the world.

Posted: **Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:43 pm**

Yeah, I remember learning about his infamous meltdowns while filming Julie Taymor's Titus. Then I saw the extras on the DVD, which very much confirmed the buzz.

Posted: **Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:44 pm**

Marcel Gioberti wrote:Yeah, I remember learning about his infamous meltdowns while filming Julie Taymor's Titus.

That was Shakespeare?

Posted: **Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:47 am**

MichaelB wrote:
Marcel Gioberti wrote:Yeah, I remember learning about his infamous meltdowns while filming Julie Taymor's Titus.
That was Shakespeare?

Where have you been? (One of my favorite of his plays) Or is that a slight jab at Taymor's handling of the material?

Posted: **Fri Jan 25, 2008 1:09 am**

Cold Bishop wrote:
MichaelB wrote:
Marcel Gioberti wrote:Yeah, I remember learning about his infamous meltdowns while filming Julie Taymor's Titus.
That was Shakespeare?
Where have you been? (One of my favorite of his plays) Or is that a slight jab at Taymor's handling of the material?

I assume he was jabbing Taymor. I personally think she made an otherwise unremarkable revenge tragedy a la Thomas Kyd something not just relevant but interesting. I just watched Titus last week for the first time in many years. It's not without flaws, but there's some genius at work, particularly the Aaron character. The ending is also sublime, makes me weep. Sorry about that.

Posted: **Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:03 am**

I don't know if I'd call it unremarkable. I always thought it has a lot of potential greatness in it, but I guess I'll concede that my enjoyment of the play has always more to do with me imagining the various ways it could be stages and interpreted.

The film is uneven definitely... It has a lot of great moments and overall, its a great and inspired staging of the play, bloody and over the top as it well should be, but everytime that techno music starts up, or theres a music video style montage, I can't help but gag. And don't get me started on the whole Matrix 360° at the end.

Posted: **Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:01 am**

flyonthewall2983 wrote:From imdb.com

Jack Nicholson has hinted he warned tragic Heath Ledger against taking on the role of The Joker in the new Batman film. Ledger, 28 - who was declared dead at 3:30pm at his Manhattan apartment on Tuesday - publicly declared himself exhausted and sleep deprived in November following the grueling shoot for The Dark Knight. He also revealed in an interview with the New York Times he'd resorted to taking sleeping pills - an overdose of which is believed to be the cause of his death - in a desperate bid to catch up on rest. And Nicholson, who famously portrayed the menacing Joker in Tim Burton's 1989 movie Batman, implied to the waiting crowd outside plush London restaurant The Wolesley on Tuesday night he spoke to Ledger about his role in The Dark Knight - and warned him about the pitfalls of taking on such a demanding challenge. When asked by the London crowds for his reaction to Ledger's untimely demise, a defeated Nicholson simply replied, "I told him so." Batman Begins prequel The Dark Knight is due to be released in July.

I hate to add more about Jack's response to Ledger's death as I know those sorts of things are frowned upon here, but...

I don't recall hearing him say "I told him so" in that clip of Jack responding to a question about Ledger's death. What I recall was that the paps stop Jack, inform him of Ledger's death, to which Jack says "My God, that's awful." Then he says, "I warned him." Although I've read that what Jack actually said was, "I warned them."

Other gossip: I read that Jack wasn't referring to "warning" Heath about playing The Joker, whom he claims to have never met, but rather warning people collectively about the dangers of using sleeping pills like Ambien. I could dig up some links on this if I wasn't so lazy.

Posted: **Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:16 pm**

Marcel Gioberti wrote:I personally think she made an otherwise unremarkable revenge tragedy a la Thomas Kyd something not just relevant but interesting.

Conversely, I thought she took a hugely underrated play and swamped the text with fidgety distractions. Not unenjoyably, but Jane Howell's 1985 BBC production was certainly far more relevant and consequently more interesting (at least to me).

Then again, I watched them literally back to back when writing this, which probably isn't the best way of appreciating them!

Posted: **Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:11 pm**

MichaelB wrote:
Marcel Gioberti wrote:I personally think she made an otherwise unremarkable revenge tragedy a la Thomas Kyd something not just relevant but interesting.
Conversely, I thought she took a hugely underrated play and swamped the text with fidgety distractions. Not unenjoyably, but Jane Howell's 1985 BBC production was certainly far more relevant and consequently more interesting (at least to me).

Then again, I watched them literally back to back when writing this, which probably isn't the best way of appreciating them!

Not to derail the thread too much, but is said BBC production available on DVD?

Posted: **Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:04 pm**

Cold Bishop wrote:Not to derail the thread too much, but is said BBC production available on DVD?

Yes, either separately or as part of the complete BBC Television Shakespeare package.

The disc itself is barebones, though it does have optional subtitles. Picture is 4:3, sound is mono and source is clearly analogue videotape - but you wouldn't expect anything else.

Posted: **Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:07 am**

I'm afraid after Titus I refuse to watch any Shakespeare adaptation unless it has three motorcycles and a giant inflatable in the shape of a big breasted woman floating in a pool - or at the very least Judi Dench in an approximation of Jessica Lange's gold bustier dancing to 30s jazz!

Posted: **Tue Jan 29, 2008 4:17 am**

Warner's doesn't waste any time in "honoring" Heath Ledger.

Christopher Nolan's tribute to Ledger.

Posted: **Tue Jan 29, 2008 3:26 pm**

Daniel Day-Lewis dedicates his SAG award to Ledger.

Posted: **Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:32 am**

New pics including a better look at the new batsuit.

Posted: **Wed Jan 30, 2008 3:28 am**

Antoine Doinel wrote:New pics including a better look at the new batsuit.

What an embarrassing codpiece.

Posted: **Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:04 am**

Perhaps Christian Bale is packing a lot heat down there.....

Posted: **Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:37 am**

That suit looks laughably retarded, as though they were trying to pack as many panels as possible into the whole getup.

Posted: **Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:23 am**

Slate runs down the various problems facing Warner Brothers' in the wake of Ledger's death. Apparently, they may hire a voice actor to do some post-production voice looping that might be required. As for the marketing campaign, they had planned to start with the focus on the Joker, but segue to Two-Face as the release date drew closer anyway.

Posted: **Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:37 am**

Antoine Doinel wrote:As for the marketing campaign, they had planned to start with the focus on the Joker, but segue to Two-Face as the release date drew closer anyway.

Thank god! I beginning to worry that they'd start refocusing attention on Batman.

"The Dark Knight" -- man, that's such a weak title! This film should have been called "Joker and Two-Face Screw With the Fool In the Retarded Costume."

Posted: **Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:30 pm**

a.khan wrote:
Antoine Doinel wrote:As for the marketing campaign, they had planned to start with the focus on the Joker, but segue to Two-Face as the release date drew closer anyway.
Thank god! I beginning to worry that they'd start refocusing attention on Batman.

"The Dark Knight" -- man, that's such a weak title! This film should have been called "Joker and Two-Face Screw With the Fool In the Retarded Costume."

You gotta market what's new. The best advertisement for Batman himself was the first movie; now you have to convince people to go see the second one.

Posted: **Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:56 am**

Having finally seen the extended IMAX footage last night, this is easily my most anticipated film of the year. It looks like the grittiest, coldest Batman film to date. The entire bank heist sequence and the reveal of the Joker is handled beautifully and it looks fantastic on IMAX. I was originally debating whether or not I would end up seeing this in IMAX (and dealing with the sold out screenings on the one screen in my area) or on a regular screen but this preview had me sold.

How much longer is it until this opens?

Harvey Dent needs your support.

Posted: **Sun Mar 09, 2008 2:01 pm**

Batman’s Burden: A Director Confronts Darkness and Death

Posted: **Wed Mar 12, 2008 11:37 pm**

I'm reticient to mention this since, as far as I know, it hasn't been officially confirmed. But. There has been a lot of talk regarding the way Nolan and Aaron Eckhart have decided to deal with the role of Harvey Dent/Two-Face.

Word in the 'net is that Nolan shot complementary takes of Eckhart in Two-Face makeup so he could visually represent the duality of Dent. Meaning, he's a fifty-fifty split of the same actor giving two wildly divergent performances in the same shot. Both will be present in the shot but only one, chosen in post, will dominate at any given moment.

Is this a first? Has this ever been tried before? I cannot think of a single other instance...

Posted: **Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:45 am**

Well, Mary Harron did that with Willem Dafoe's "interrogation" of Christian Bale in American Psycho, though there was no makeup involved.

This is, of course, based on my assumption that I understood your post.

criterionforum.org

The Dark Knight Trilogy (Christopher Nolan, 2005-2012)