Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: The Dark Knight

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: The Dark Knight Page: <<   < prev  34 35 36 37 [38]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Dark Knight - 24/8/2012 4:50:27 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

It is schematic, that's the point, it's just how well you layer things on so that the skeleton doesn't show.

For instance, I didn't mention 'dramatic apex' that according to this schematic structure is the point of no return for the story, it will now unstoppably flow towards an inevitable conclusion because there is a choice that must be made. To take Jaws as an example, when Brody's son is nearly attacked by the shark, it is basically slap bang in the middle of the running time (where the dramatic apex always comes, and it is this event that forces Brody to confront his fear of the water and get involved in the shark hunt personally, and I suppose if I could be arsed, I could check exactly what happens in TDK at the comparable point in the film)

I'm only citing something I questioned very much when it was introduced to me, that I couldn't argue against any more when I looked at films using the 'template' and noting that dividing the running time into 5, whatever the story actually was, and however it was narratively presented, each of the five acts built towards something significant and kicked the film up a notch, and in the middle of the 'conflict' act, something very significant upon which the entire film turned took place.

Key elements are obviously introduced early, but the playing out of the points happens across the film as a whole, and rather slavishly in tune with the 5 Cs




Interesting. I'd need to examine a number of case studies (your Jaws example is good) to see how useful and univerally applicable the model is. However surely the fact that all five acts are in an order would necessarily mean that there's an element of escalation which may not be of the clear building block variety? Even films that are a "beginning, muddle and end" still have building-to-a-climax of sorts!

You make some really interesting points. You should go check out the Dark Knight Rises thread - it's still going, and would certainly benefit from some such excellent on-topic analysis




MORE excellent on-topic analysis that should be. Me and Chris are still kicking it old school! (and RGirvan's there too)

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 1111
RE: The Dark Knight - 24/8/2012 5:14:10 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1899
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

It is schematic, that's the point, it's just how well you layer things on so that the skeleton doesn't show.

For instance, I didn't mention 'dramatic apex' that according to this schematic structure is the point of no return for the story, it will now unstoppably flow towards an inevitable conclusion because there is a choice that must be made. To take Jaws as an example, when Brody's son is nearly attacked by the shark, it is basically slap bang in the middle of the running time (where the dramatic apex always comes, and it is this event that forces Brody to confront his fear of the water and get involved in the shark hunt personally, and I suppose if I could be arsed, I could check exactly what happens in TDK at the comparable point in the film)

I'm only citing something I questioned very much when it was introduced to me, that I couldn't argue against any more when I looked at films using the 'template' and noting that dividing the running time into 5, whatever the story actually was, and however it was narratively presented, each of the five acts built towards something significant and kicked the film up a notch, and in the middle of the 'conflict' act, something very significant upon which the entire film turned took place.

Key elements are obviously introduced early, but the playing out of the points happens across the film as a whole, and rather slavishly in tune with the 5 Cs




Interesting. I'd need to examine a number of case studies (your Jaws example is good) to see how useful and univerally applicable the model is. However surely the fact that all five acts are in an order would necessarily mean that there's an element of escalation which may not be of the clear building block variety? Even films that are a "beginning, muddle and end" still have building-to-a-climax of sorts!

You make some really interesting points. You should go check out the Dark Knight Rises thread - it's still going, and would certainly benefit from some such excellent on-topic analysis



Howver the skill is in doing it in blocks, and making appear to NOT be. The 'mini daramatic peak' at the end of thr first of the four of the five acts is istself built towards, and done well enough, its impact, and the effect it has on the direction the narrative then takes seems totally seamless. Obviously, storytelling has natural progression and notions auch as structure are about looking at how things already worked. But with structure in mind you can make it work for you, though naturally, some efforts think the structure is why something works, not just how something works. You can follow the 'rules' totally and still produce bullshit! Well structured bullshit, but bullshit all the same.

Been in the TDKR thread, commented at length, on such subjects as WHY WOULD GORDON SEND ALL THE COPS TO THE SEWERS, with suggestions such as the previous films showed grave actions when a threat wasn't acted upon immediately, Gordon is eaten up with guilt by the consequences of not acting sooner, and when seeing something that could be even worse, it was in character to try and make up for it by going in heavy, and fast, and not waiting to consult others. Also, answered why Batman didn't go for Bane's mask earlier with something like when Bane has the mental upper hand, he breaks Batman;s mask, symbolically breaking him, and when the position are reversed, so are the results. In other words, the action shown totally ties in with character and theme, as established in earlier films and/or in the new one

It. Does. No. Good.


< Message edited by jobloffski -- 24/8/2012 5:23:20 PM >

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 1112
RE: The Dark Knight - 24/8/2012 5:21:24 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

It is schematic, that's the point, it's just how well you layer things on so that the skeleton doesn't show.

For instance, I didn't mention 'dramatic apex' that according to this schematic structure is the point of no return for the story, it will now unstoppably flow towards an inevitable conclusion because there is a choice that must be made. To take Jaws as an example, when Brody's son is nearly attacked by the shark, it is basically slap bang in the middle of the running time (where the dramatic apex always comes, and it is this event that forces Brody to confront his fear of the water and get involved in the shark hunt personally, and I suppose if I could be arsed, I could check exactly what happens in TDK at the comparable point in the film)

I'm only citing something I questioned very much when it was introduced to me, that I couldn't argue against any more when I looked at films using the 'template' and noting that dividing the running time into 5, whatever the story actually was, and however it was narratively presented, each of the five acts built towards something significant and kicked the film up a notch, and in the middle of the 'conflict' act, something very significant upon which the entire film turned took place.

Key elements are obviously introduced early, but the playing out of the points happens across the film as a whole, and rather slavishly in tune with the 5 Cs




Interesting. I'd need to examine a number of case studies (your Jaws example is good) to see how useful and univerally applicable the model is. However surely the fact that all five acts are in an order would necessarily mean that there's an element of escalation which may not be of the clear building block variety? Even films that are a "beginning, muddle and end" still have building-to-a-climax of sorts!

You make some really interesting points. You should go check out the Dark Knight Rises thread - it's still going, and would certainly benefit from some such excellent on-topic analysis




MORE excellent on-topic analysis that should be. Me and Chris are still kicking it old school! (and RGirvan's there too)



Shame Fluke Skywalker's not around - he made a lively contribution, although he's still wrong about the cops down the sewers!

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 1113
RE: The Dark Knight - 24/8/2012 5:28:41 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

It is schematic, that's the point, it's just how well you layer things on so that the skeleton doesn't show.

For instance, I didn't mention 'dramatic apex' that according to this schematic structure is the point of no return for the story, it will now unstoppably flow towards an inevitable conclusion because there is a choice that must be made. To take Jaws as an example, when Brody's son is nearly attacked by the shark, it is basically slap bang in the middle of the running time (where the dramatic apex always comes, and it is this event that forces Brody to confront his fear of the water and get involved in the shark hunt personally, and I suppose if I could be arsed, I could check exactly what happens in TDK at the comparable point in the film)

I'm only citing something I questioned very much when it was introduced to me, that I couldn't argue against any more when I looked at films using the 'template' and noting that dividing the running time into 5, whatever the story actually was, and however it was narratively presented, each of the five acts built towards something significant and kicked the film up a notch, and in the middle of the 'conflict' act, something very significant upon which the entire film turned took place.

Key elements are obviously introduced early, but the playing out of the points happens across the film as a whole, and rather slavishly in tune with the 5 Cs




Interesting. I'd need to examine a number of case studies (your Jaws example is good) to see how useful and univerally applicable the model is. However surely the fact that all five acts are in an order would necessarily mean that there's an element of escalation which may not be of the clear building block variety? Even films that are a "beginning, muddle and end" still have building-to-a-climax of sorts!

You make some really interesting points. You should go check out the Dark Knight Rises thread - it's still going, and would certainly benefit from some such excellent on-topic analysis



Howver the skill is in doing it in blocks, and making appear to NOT be. The 'mini daramatic peak' at the end of thr first of the four of the five acts is istself built towards, and done well enough, its impact, and the effect it has on the direction the narrative then takes seems totally seamless. Obviously, storytelling has natural progression and notions auch as structure are about looking at how things already worked. But with structure in mind you can make it work for you, though naturally, some efforts think the structure is why something works, not just how something works. You can follow the 'rules' totally and still produce bullshit! Well structured bullshit, but bullshit all the same.

Been in the TDKR thread, commented at length, on such subjects as WHY WOULD GORDON SEND ALL THE COPS TO THE SEWERS, with suggestions such as the previous films showed grave actions when a threat wasn't acted upon immediately, Gordon is eaten up with guilt by the consequences of not acting sooner, and when seeing something that could be even worse, it was in character to try and make up for it by going in heavy, and fast, and not waiting to consult others.

It. Does. No. Good.



I appreciate that the Five Act Structure you're invoking is not synonymous with the ol' theatre one, but isn't it true that traditionally there's been a dip in the drama - i.e. it's an upwards curve, level, dip, highest peak rather than a steady rise that might be suggested by a model postulating escalation as the key? Of course one could argue that an attention grabbing opening scene ought not be ranked hierarchically near the top of dramatic significance just because it has a lot of explosions (I've mostly forgotten Transformers 3, but was its opening not Rosie Huntington-Whiteley's ass? Not sure how this reflects the deep themes and subtext Bay was going for ) but I think structurally there probably are a lot of movies that start with a genuine high (Edmund White once made the interesting point that, in a work of genius, every page and paragraph has the DNA of the whole) dip and then build to climax near the end. Is the postulated 5 act structure that useful if 3, 4 and 5 are largely the stages of part 3 of a hypothetical 3 act structure?

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 1114
RE: The Dark Knight - 24/8/2012 5:29:56 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski



Been in the TDKR thread, commented at length, on such subjects as WHY WOULD GORDON SEND ALL THE COPS TO THE SEWERS, with suggestions such as the previous films showed grave actions when a threat wasn't acted upon immediately, Gordon is eaten up with guilt by the consequences of not acting sooner, and when seeing something that could be even worse, it was in character to try and make up for it by going in heavy, and fast, and not waiting to consult others. Also, answered why Batman didn't go for Bane's mask earlier with something like when Bane has the mental upper hand, he breaks Batman;s mask, symbolically breaking him, and when the position are reversed, so are the results. In other words, the action shown totally ties in with character and theme, as established in earlier films and/or in the new one




Quoted For Truth

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 1115
RE: The Dark Knight - 24/8/2012 5:31:18 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski


It. Does. No. Good.




And this

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 1116
RE: The Dark Knight - 24/8/2012 5:38:47 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski


It. Does. No. Good.




And this



Still good to talk though - people joked about the thread getting to 100 pages but, if everyone pulls together for the cause, I think it's an achievable goal!

that said, obviously if the on-topic discussion stops then I wouldn't want to just continue the thread indefinitely.

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 1117
RE: The Dark Knight - 25/8/2012 1:20:00 PM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1557
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

The Joker doesn't need to know Batman is Bruce. All he needed to note was that Batman went for her without thinking. In his mind he figures out that she is important to him.

In fact the whole Coleman Reese subplot is about the Joker no longer wishing to know who Batman is. It is pretty much established that Wayne wanted to save Rachel. Heck, Harvey wanted Batman to save Rachel.


This. He doesn't know. He also doesn't really care.



I think he knows (or at least suspects - Wayne employee Coleman Reese's threat to go public only confirming such suspicions) and still doesn't care! As he said in the comics once - that IS his real face!

(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 1118
RE: The Dark Knight - 25/8/2012 1:25:19 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: chris kilby


quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

The Joker doesn't need to know Batman is Bruce. All he needed to note was that Batman went for her without thinking. In his mind he figures out that she is important to him.

In fact the whole Coleman Reese subplot is about the Joker no longer wishing to know who Batman is. It is pretty much established that Wayne wanted to save Rachel. Heck, Harvey wanted Batman to save Rachel.


This. He doesn't know. He also doesn't really care.



I think he knows (or at least suspects - Wayne employee Coleman Reese's threat to go public only confirming such suspicions) and still doesn't care! As he said in the comics once - that IS his real face!



Woah, two Batman threads at once Chris, impressive!

comics alliance had a great article on the supposed truism of Bruce Wayne being the mask to Batman's 'real' face, will see if I can find it.

(in reply to chris kilby)
Post #: 1119
RE: The Dark Knight - 25/8/2012 1:31:11 PM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1557
Joined: 31/3/2010
quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy

As for "plot holes", Batman would have reacted as he did if ANYONE had been thrown out of the window, and people are presupposing he had further need to kill/capture hostages. Joker has a plan, Dent wasn't there, Rachel was thrown out the window. You can claim it's more in keeping with his character to kill all the hostages, but I'd disagree. Joker has a plan (I know he says he doesn't but Bad guys lie!) .




Yeah, but the only reason The Joker was there in the first place was to get Harvey Dent. Woulda been a bit remiss of him not to have a bloody good look round after Bats went basejumping with his squeeze. And as my missus pointed out, that great big cupboard door jammed with a broom handle (or whatever it was) was a bit of a giveaway. It is undeniably a huge (arguably lazy) plot hole. More a gaping chasm, actually. Not as gaping as those cops down the sewers, mind...

Actually, I would say that The Dark Knight's plot holes are far more egregious/problematic than those of The Dark Knight Rises, although we have had four years to spot them all. And unlike a lot of the alleged "plot holes" in The Dark Knight Rises, the plot holes in The Dark Knight actually exist.

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 1120
RE: The Dark Knight - 25/8/2012 1:33:07 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: chris kilby

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy

As for "plot holes", Batman would have reacted as he did if ANYONE had been thrown out of the window, and people are presupposing he had further need to kill/capture hostages. Joker has a plan, Dent wasn't there, Rachel was thrown out the window. You can claim it's more in keeping with his character to kill all the hostages, but I'd disagree. Joker has a plan (I know he says he doesn't but Bad guys lie!) .




Yeah, but the only reason The Joker was there in the first place was to get Harvey Dent. Woulda been a bit remiss of him not to have a bloody good look round after Bats went basejumping with his squeeze. And as my missus pointed out, that great big cupboard door jammed with a broom handle (or whatever it was) was a bit of a giveaway. It is undeniably a huge (arguably lazy) plot hole. More a gaping chasm, actually. Not as gaping as those cops down the sewers, mind...

Actually, I would say that The Dark Knight's plot holes are far more egregious/problematic than those of The Dark Knight Rises, although we have had four years to spot them all. And unlike a lot of the alleged "plot holes" in The Dark Knight Rises, the plot holes in The Dark Knight actually exist.



Yes, but Joker says "for a while I thought you were Dent". It's plausible that he left the party satisfied that the guy jumping out in the batsuit was, or probably could be Dent.

(in reply to chris kilby)
Post #: 1121
RE: The Dark Knight - 25/8/2012 1:36:33 PM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1557
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy

Woah, two Batman threads at once Chris, impressive!



That's nuthin'. The other day you thought I was on the same thread twice at the same time!

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 1122
RE: The Dark Knight - 25/8/2012 1:38:13 PM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1557
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: chris kilby

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy

As for "plot holes", Batman would have reacted as he did if ANYONE had been thrown out of the window, and people are presupposing he had further need to kill/capture hostages. Joker has a plan, Dent wasn't there, Rachel was thrown out the window. You can claim it's more in keeping with his character to kill all the hostages, but I'd disagree. Joker has a plan (I know he says he doesn't but Bad guys lie!) .




Yeah, but the only reason The Joker was there in the first place was to get Harvey Dent. Woulda been a bit remiss of him not to have a bloody good look round after Bats went basejumping with his squeeze. And as my missus pointed out, that great big cupboard door jammed with a broom handle (or whatever it was) was a bit of a giveaway. It is undeniably a huge (arguably lazy) plot hole. More a gaping chasm, actually. Not as gaping as those cops down the sewers, mind...

Actually, I would say that The Dark Knight's plot holes are far more egregious/problematic than those of The Dark Knight Rises, although we have had four years to spot them all. And unlike a lot of the alleged "plot holes" in The Dark Knight Rises, the plot holes in The Dark Knight actually exist.



Yes, but Joker says "for a while I thought you were Dent". It's plausible that he left the party satisfied that the guy jumping out in the batsuit was, or probably could be Dent.



Yeah, that's a good one. Never thought of that.

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 1123
RE: The Dark Knight - 25/8/2012 1:44:02 PM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1557
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy

Well said dude. Except for the bit where you call Killing Joke overrated and praise Jeph Loeb



I didn't actually praise Loeb. I merely pointed out that The Long Halloween clearly inspired The Dark Knight - primarily Maroni and the idea that, Heisenberg-like, Batman's very existence has led to a power shift from traditional gangsters to freaks. I thought it was OK, but it still read like Miller's sloppy seconds. Most Batman comics do, which is why I don't read so many super hero comics these days. After Dark Knight/Watchmen, what was the point...?

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 1124
RE: The Dark Knight - 25/8/2012 1:48:04 PM   
cerebusboy


Posts: 1552
Joined: 1/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: chris kilby


quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: chris kilby

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy

As for "plot holes", Batman would have reacted as he did if ANYONE had been thrown out of the window, and people are presupposing he had further need to kill/capture hostages. Joker has a plan, Dent wasn't there, Rachel was thrown out the window. You can claim it's more in keeping with his character to kill all the hostages, but I'd disagree. Joker has a plan (I know he says he doesn't but Bad guys lie!) .




Yeah, but the only reason The Joker was there in the first place was to get Harvey Dent. Woulda been a bit remiss of him not to have a bloody good look round after Bats went basejumping with his squeeze. And as my missus pointed out, that great big cupboard door jammed with a broom handle (or whatever it was) was a bit of a giveaway. It is undeniably a huge (arguably lazy) plot hole. More a gaping chasm, actually. Not as gaping as those cops down the sewers, mind...

Actually, I would say that The Dark Knight's plot holes are far more egregious/problematic than those of The Dark Knight Rises, although we have had four years to spot them all. And unlike a lot of the alleged "plot holes" in The Dark Knight Rises, the plot holes in The Dark Knight actually exist.



Yes, but Joker says "for a while I thought you were Dent". It's plausible that he left the party satisfied that the guy jumping out in the batsuit was, or probably could be Dent.



Yeah, that's a good one. Never thought of that.



Aside from which, it's obvious that the Joker is more preoccupied with Bats than he is anyone else. I can certainly see him having a "forget Dent, this is a whole new ball game" after tangling with Batman. I doubt Joker has anything like the grandiose plan he eventually implements at the party scene (especially if we assume he just wanted to find Dent to kill him)

(in reply to chris kilby)
Post #: 1125
RE: The Dark Knight - 25/8/2012 1:54:24 PM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1557
Joined: 31/3/2010
quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy

'Realism', even assuming it is necessarily contrary to genre fiction, is a recent innovation, a literary cul-de-sac. To posit it as the only mechanism for serious themes is demonstrable nonsense.


Precisely my argument against Jimmy McGovern's criticism of the likes of Doctor Who. Actually, it's Clive Barker's argument: if you lazily dismiss all non-realistic, non-naturalistic fiction, you're invalidating a lot of the literary canon - Shakespeare, Dickens, all the ancient myths and legends which have inspired so much art, literature and movies in their own right, not least The Bible. He's also insulting a lot of his TV drama predecessors. Notably the defiantly non-naturalistic Dennis Potter. Maybe McGovern's never seen Pennies From Heaven or The Singing Detective. Or what I still consider THE Greatest TV Drama of All Time, Troy Kennedy Martin's Edge of Darkness, which beneath the contemporary nuclear thriller surface has some very funny, mystical ideas indeed.

I admire McGovern's work as well (even if it can be annoyingly didactic and on-the-nose), but he's talking out his realistic arse when he says silly things like that.

What is "realism," anyway? All drama is life with the boring bits left out. Soap operas, on the other hand, are life with extra boring bits added. In fact, the more drama aspires to "realism" the more it exposes how unreal it is. And I'm not just talking about bat-themed masked vigilantes - how come no-one in Eastenders watches TV, talks about the news, commutes to work or owns a washing machine...?


< Message edited by chris kilby -- 25/8/2012 2:11:08 PM >

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 1126
RE: The Dark Knight - 25/8/2012 3:50:07 PM   
chris kilby

 

Posts: 1557
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: cerebusboy

Woah, two Batman threads at once Chris, impressive!



Haven't you heard? I'm omnipresent. As well as omniscient. Although this is occasionally mistaken for pedantry...

(in reply to cerebusboy)
Post #: 1127
RE: The Dark Knight - 13/9/2012 3:51:48 AM   
Emyr Thy King

 

Posts: 2185
Joined: 13/4/2006
From: London
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

The Joker doesn't need to know Batman is Bruce. All he needed to note was that Batman went for her without thinking. In his mind he figures out that she is important to him.

In fact the whole Coleman Reese subplot is about the Joker no longer wishing to know who Batman is. It is pretty much established that Wayne wanted to save Rachel. Heck, Harvey wanted Batman to save Rachel.


Here's an interesting excerpt from the novelisation for TDK following the charity event in Bruce's penthouse:

The Joker looked back toward the penthouse as his getaway car sped away. He breathed hard, exhilarated even as a stream of blood ran down his face and tells the driver how the Batman saved Rachel and starts to wonder if they have a relationship or Batman does this with everyone and this can lead to his downfall. He smacked the back of the driver's seat. Driver: "What do we do about Dent?" The Joker: "I'm a man of my word."

TDK novel (click)

For anyone who's really eager, there's a book with the screenplay for the entire trilogy and it includs scenes that were cut/weren't filmed:

The Dark Knight Trilogy (click)

Actually, there's a good 'look inside' feature Amazon, it has a scene that was cut from BB where Bruce speaks to one of the villagers before ascending the mountain to the League of Shadows' lair.


< Message edited by Emyr Thy King -- 13/9/2012 12:27:08 PM >

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 1128
Page:   <<   < prev  34 35 36 37 [38]
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: The Dark Knight Page: <<   < prev  34 35 36 37 [38]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.125