July 14th, 2008
01:53 PM ET

Three thoughts on 'The Dark Knight'

Just got back from “The Dark Knight.” The following is not a review, but merely observations - to borrow from Sports Illustrated’s Peter King, three things I think I think. (And I don’t think there are any stupendous spoilers to follow, but as always, I think “caveat lector” is in order. You have been warned):

Heath Ledger's Joker (above) may have earned all the raves, but don't forget about the rest of the cast - including Gary Oldman and Aaron Eckhart.

1. Heath Ledger has been earning all the praise - and justifiably, since his Joker is terrific - but the heart of “The Dark Knight” belongs to its one unalloyed good guy, Gary Oldman’s police lieutenant Jim Gordon. Who would have thought that the actor who created a number of his own reckless personalities - including “Sid and Nancy’s” Sid Vicious, “JFK’s” Lee Harvey Oswald and “Hannibal’s” Mason Verger - could be so true?

2. a. I miss Anton Furst. The production designer for 1989’s “Batman” created a bleak, cavernous Gotham City based on a New York with no zoning laws. “The Dark Knight” calls its locale Gotham City, but like “Batman Begins,” it was largely filmed in Chicago - and it looks like Chicago, right down to the landmark Board of Trade looming over one major scene. (“Batman Begins,” with large chunks set at Wayne Manor and in the Far East, didn’t make the city as big a character - nor was it as brightly lit, at least in memory.)

2. b. On the other hand, though many critics will call “The Dark Knight” a “comic-book movie” (which is often damning praise), it’s really more like a gangster film with supernatural elements. (It even includes Eric Roberts and his gang talking in the tough-guy ‘30s gangster movie vernacular, and - at times - Ledger's voice seemed to contain elements of Peter Lorre and James Cagney.) In that respect, Chicago is the perfect setting, with its rich film history leading from “The Public Enemy” to “The Sting” to “The Untouchables.” Given more time and a story that didn’t require summer-movie heroics and special effects, I think director Christopher Nolan could have given “The Dark Knight” even more depth than it has. At times the operatic splendor of the film, along with its deliberate pace, reminded me of “The Godfather.” I’m not joking.

3. When a movie is called “The Dark Knight,” it means it. The emphasis is very much on “Dark.” If there’s a nod to its PG-13 audience, it’s that - for all the gunshots and explosions - there isn’t much blood. Which doesn’t mean that the movie doesn’t have a pessimistic soul. If it had been made in the early ‘70s - free of today’s glossiness - it would have made “The French Connection” look hopeful.

It should be noted that "The Dark Knight" is from Warner Bros., which, like CNN, is a unit of Time Warner.

Stay tuned for Tom Charity’s review, coming Thursday. And here’s what Time had to say.

Finally, if you've got some Batman trivia, we've got the perfect place for it: our iReport site. Go here and offer your suggestion.

- Todd Leopold, CNN.com Entertainment Producer

Filed under: movies

soundoff (112 Responses)
  1. Commissioner Gordon

    1. The old "Rain Man" argument that an actor shouldn't be lauded for a "one-note" performance is foolish. That dooms anyone playing the Joker to dismissive reviews. And I can't dismiss either Jack Nicholson or Heath Ledger for their spectacular, nuanced performances.

    2. I thought 1989's "Batman" was too dark, too murky. Many comic book movies are, and that's why I found "The Dark Knight" a refreshing mix of tones.

    3. I think Chicago is a good change of locale for the Batman series. I agree that the city's criminal pedigree makes it a conveniently nuanced background. And speaking of Peter Lorre, I too thought Ledger at times almost sounded like him.

    July 28, 2008 at 4:07 pm | Report abuse |
  2. sean

    Wow, can't believe how many people attacked that person for making a joke about buildings in NYC falling down. That was 2001. It's almost 7 years since that happened. If New Yorkers (of which I am one) can't get over it and move past it, then....well....maybe that's why we're still at war in the middle east. And if you can't joke about it – if it's somehow "off limits" – than you are completely missing the point about American freedom and are falling into line with the terrorists. If someone dies, or if one of Manhattans million skyscrapers fall down, and I CAN'T joke about it, then what has America become? (Oh and PS: how many buildings have we knocked down in the middle east since October 2001? How many people have we killed? Self-righteous jerks.)

    July 28, 2008 at 2:47 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Karen

    Not to divert this enthralling geography lesson...but I'd like to show my appreciation for this movie and the cast.

    Heath and Christian get a lot of props, but I must agree that Gary Oldman was ridiculously great. He is a phenomenal actor – not many people could move from Harry Potter (Sirius Black, of course) to Batman (Lt. Gordon) to JFK (Lee H. Oswald) and be so amazingly convincing in all three. The only weak spot in the cast was Maggie G (better than Katie H of course, but she set the bar awfully low). Maggie is such a great actress, she just lacked chemistry with her male counterparts...

    The Dark Knight was a great movie – see it often!

    July 19, 2008 at 8:42 pm | Report abuse |
  4. the joker

    Heath Ledger's performance earns him Oscar buzz. period.

    July 19, 2008 at 2:16 pm | Report abuse |
  5. David

    I must agree about Gary Oldman and Aaron Eckhart. I've always loved Oldman, and his performance of Gordan as an understated Mensch is brilliant. No scene stealing, no over the top scenery chewing, just getting recognized for hard work and a fine fine portrayal.

    Eckert as well is riveting as Harvey Dent. So much so I was hoping Two-Face wouldn't happen until another movie.

    As for Bale not being mentioned, well he was fine, but so much about Batman isn't about Batman but about the surrounding characters. This movie made choice and it works very well. From Freeman, to Caine, to Oldman to Eckhart, an embarrassingly talented ensemble. talent.

    July 18, 2008 at 9:48 pm | Report abuse |
  6. Self

    Isn't it amazing how many angry people there are in the world? I have not seen the movie but am looking forward to it.

    If people are fans of comics and choose to have a friendly intellectual debate about which real city is/was being represented by a fictional one, that is there right, and perhaps they enjoy the discussion and reading other peoples opinions.

    From everything I have read, it sounds like an enjoyable time at the movies, which is all I expect.

    July 18, 2008 at 5:33 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Michelle

    JD, if you're still reading this – yes the tag is necessary as the opinions stated in this article are produced by CNN, which is – by however many degrees – related to the film itself. In other words, we want you to know that we realized that we are connected, and in saying that, are not biased (someone somewhere would point that out, so they say it first). It's just a technicality to cover themselves. If you read a lot of articles, you'll see that alot – it's ok. It's just a journalism thing, but it is necessary.

    July 18, 2008 at 10:27 am | Report abuse |
  8. Inés

    I'm enjoying all your comments, keep it up that's what true fans do!

    July 17, 2008 at 11:10 am | Report abuse |
  9. Dan

    It feels like Batman has come full circle with the first in the series directed by Tim Burton. Doesn't the Joker look like "Beetlejuice", another of Burton's characters?

    July 16, 2008 at 5:07 pm | Report abuse |
  10. Dale


    While indeed Nicholson's Joker was amazing it wasn't really the Joker.
    Joker is a maniac. Not the dancing romantic maniac but the maniac who knocks on Barbara Gordons door and shoots her leaving her handicapped.

    Nicholson was far to goofy. The Joker is the maniacal evil to Batmans darkness trying to cling to light.

    Nicholson is a great actor but personally I think that Michael Keaton would have been a better choice as Joker.

    Did you know Keaton was turned down to play Bruce's father in the new version like Adam West was in the 1st Tim Burton film.

    July 16, 2008 at 4:19 pm | Report abuse |
  11. DickGrayson

    Don't know if someone already metioned this but in the comics, New York, Gotham, Chicago and Metropolis co-exist. In fact, Nightwing, the former Robin, lives in NYC.

    In addtion, Bludhaven is near Gotham which is near New York, not far from Metropolis which is like a "future" advanced city.

    It doesn't really make sense but the fictional cities....Keystone, Central and the "real" NYC, Chigago....are all jumbled together in the DC universe.

    Got my IMAX tickets two weeks ago and I can't wait!!

    July 16, 2008 at 3:56 pm | Report abuse |
  12. SisterAmerica

    Thanks to those who spoke so strongly against the incredible foolishness and idoicy which is ANDROLOMA.

    July 16, 2008 at 3:10 pm | Report abuse |
  13. MindyM

    Androloma –

    My family lived through the attack on NYC on 9/11. They went through hell. They also lost people that they knew and loved. I find your comments appalling and outrageous. You should be ashamed.

    As far as whether it's New York or Chicago or whatever, WHO CARES!!! Let's just enjoy this movie on its face and get over territorial rights, shall we? It's a complete and utter waste of time to dig up all of these supposed facts to support the argument for NYC at Gotham or Chicago or Kansas City or Kalamazoo.

    I am looking forward with great anticipation to Heath Ledger's portrayal of the Joker. I am a huge fan and was devastated by his untimely death. The trailers and previews and HBO's First Look show an unbelievably brilliant and mesmerizing performance. Yes, it would appear that Heath has taken the Joker to a much darker place. He is a true psychopath, totally without conscience or empathy or true humanity. What I have seen is beyond amazing. I just wish Heath was still with us, so we could have many more magnificent performances to thrill us.

    God bless you, Heath Ledger.

    July 16, 2008 at 12:26 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Chicago Jeff

    Wow, so this guy has a problem with Batman doing his thing in chicago...typical east coast elitist. chicago makes this movie.

    July 16, 2008 at 10:29 am | Report abuse |
  15. Greg

    JerryC July 15th, 2008 11:04 am ET

    this movie is very intense… children should not be taken to this film
    They'll probably fall asleep. two and half hours was way too long for this flick. It easily could have been edited down to an hour and forty-five minutes.

    July 15, 2008 at 7:37 pm | Report abuse |
  16. kait

    in the original Tim Burton Batman flick, the city might have been meant to be NYC or Chicago

    but when you saw the map of the city in the Commissioner's office

    that map was of Vancouver, BC Canada.

    July 15, 2008 at 5:22 pm | Report abuse |
  17. Ron

    My question is, who's more of a loser - the nerds wasting time arguing about the location of Gotham City, or clowns like "Uncle Brian" who, displaying even less maturity, waste time reading the comments and posting unfunny messages about the nerds? What's "Uncle Brian" done lately that puts him in a position to look down on anyone?

    July 15, 2008 at 1:34 pm | Report abuse |
  18. JerryC

    this movie is very intense... children should not be taken to this film

    July 15, 2008 at 11:04 am | Report abuse |
  19. Max

    JD July 14th, 2008 5:34 pm ET
    Why is always necessary for CNN to print this

    “It should be noted that “The Dark Knight” is from Warner Bros., which, like CNN, is a unit of Time Warner.”

    Who cares??!!??!!??! It is annoying.

    Actually JD I think it's real important. Essentially they are promoting their own product. And as much as I can't wait to see the movie it isn't "important" as far as news goes. They could have used this space time and effort to report on something that truly matters or could change/save somebody's life. Instead they are providing publicity for a movie that they stand to profit from.

    I'm from Chicago I always imagined Gotham as Gotham... I think Chicago fits the role very well but New York obviously could have done the job too.

    Batman with Keaton and Nicholson was good, I LOVED it as a kid, but how come people don't recognize that it was a bit corny?
    I don't think Nicholson's Joker stands a chance just from the clips I've seen so far.

    At the time I loved every batman series, comic, cartoon and movie (**EXCEPT for the trash Joel Schumacher did. Arnold as Mr. Freeze? Neon lights on the Batmobile? Nipples on the Suit? terrible!!!)

    I used to love Adam West back then too but I damn sure don't wanna see Shark Repellant Spray. This Batman franchise has finally figured it out.

    July 15, 2008 at 10:04 am | Report abuse |
  20. Damon

    As stated above, Gotham City was a nickname for NY a long time ago. Also, the fictional Gotham was created and modeled after NY. Who cares though? Let the director model it after whatever city; it's his baby now and there's no amount of complaining that's gonna change it.

    Also, the Scarecrow in Batman Begins wasn't killed off; he escaped. There's also no evidence saying Ras al Goul died.

    As far as the cast, Ledger intentionally created the Joker to be a much darker character than Nicholson's back in 89 (?). The Joker in the older portrayal had rhyme and reason for his malice whereas Ledger's character is nuts just because. Also, there is no 'shoe-filling' for the Joker. Jack Nicholson's character was okay, but his Joker wasn't all that it was hyped up to be. It's just because it was Jack Nicholson. If it was Johnny Wilson from Nowheresville, USA who put on the exact performance, he wouldn't have earned half of the recognition.

    And Robin didn't ruin those two Batman sequels he was in; the directors and the rest of the cast equally pulled their weight in that. Seriously, nipples on the Batsuit? Word? Think I'm lying, go back and watch the movie. Also, the SET for those two movies was horrible. Between every location looking like a toy store and the obvious fake props, those movies were terrible. Jim Carrey was a good Riddler though...

    Batman's SUPPOSED to be a dark character, and a dark comic. Get over it.

    Oh yeah, it's gonna be a great flick though.

    PS – Metropolis is mirrored after Chicago.

    July 15, 2008 at 9:58 am | Report abuse |
  21. Hugh

    Tony said:
    "I’m more familiar with the Marvel side of the business (grew up in the Silver Age) but it seems to me that Batman has undergone a lot of transformations. The Batman of the 50s and 60s seems much less dark, much more “the police department’s best buddy”, etc. For you Batman fans…when did the Dark Knight movement really begin (I mean, for real?). Seems to me it was in the 80s and 90s"

    The Dark Knight "movement" happened back in the '70s with Denny O'Neil's work on the series but went into overdrive with Frank Miller's "The Dark Knight Returns" series and "Batman: Year One". Actually, the '80s/early '90s gave some of the greatest Batman stories to be told to date with:

    The Dark Knight Returns – Miller
    Batman: Year One – Miller
    The Killing Joke (still the definitive Joker story) – Alan Moore (should recognize his work – "V for Vendetta", "Watchmen", "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen")
    Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth (amazing story on Batman and his rogue's gallery of villians) – Grant Morrison

    The best story to come out of the late '90s is Batman: The Long Halloween by Jeph Loeb. It's a follow-on on Miller's Year One story and tracks the demise of Harvey Dent into Two-Face.

    These are the stories I grew up with as being born in the late '70s. Batman is NOT buddy-buddy. He is a dark, troubled tragic figure constantly walking the fine line between sanity and insanity trying to do what he feels is the right thing. Gotham is a city in peril constantly and he is the only one who is capable of carrying out a form of justice due to the forces at work against the just. The problem is his sense of justice is not always "proper" and while he is looked by some as a hero he is also viewed as a meanace and a vigilante threat. He wants to move on but everyone who steps up to try to replace him either dies or turns into a meanace to the city.

    Likewise, the Joker is not Caesar Romero. He's a homicidal psychopath who killed Jason Todd aka Robin in "A Death In The Family" series , paralyzed Barbra Gordon (Batgirl) and forced Commissioner Gordon to view photos of her in compromising positions to drive him insane in the Killing Joke, makes an aggressive sexual assault move against the Batman in the "Arkham Asylum" novel, and comes out of his catatonic state in "The Dark Knight Returns" when Batman reappears to pick up where he left off with his murderous rampages. A lot of the above source material Ledger used to create this Joker in "The Dark Knight".

    So how can someone like me enjoy this Batman? It's like modern Greek tragedy played out in comic panel form. The differnece being is that you have a man -for good or for bad – who always does the right thing in the end.

    July 15, 2008 at 9:50 am | Report abuse |
  22. Kevin White

    The film already disappoints me. Ledger's Joker seems shockingly low-key and restrained compared to the only true Joker - Mark Hammil's Joker. I'm afraid Ledger has not lived up to the gold standard. To me and to millions like me, Hammil IS the Joker; his over the top, crazed portrayal , which has spanned two decades now, defines the character.

    July 15, 2008 at 9:32 am | Report abuse |
  23. Brandi

    As far as villians are concerned, I would love to see Harlequin come onto the scene. She was after all the Joker's girlfriend, so it would be kind of cool to see her get revenge for anything Batman does to the Joker. I'm anxious to see how Ledger portrays the Joker.

    July 15, 2008 at 9:28 am | Report abuse |
  24. thomas

    I think this movie is going to rock. just getting tired of all the personel changes, really think they could have found a better "Rachel Dawes" for this movie.

    July 15, 2008 at 9:05 am | Report abuse |
  25. Lauren

    Will –

    In the comic books, Harvey Dent becomes Two-Face after having acid poured on his face. There is no indication in the trailers saying that Harvey Dent becomes Two-Face in the movie, but eventually, Dent = Two-Face.

    July 15, 2008 at 9:02 am | Report abuse |
  26. RichG

    We need a Superfriends movie. Wonder twin powers, activate? Form of....Oh, and Kasey Kasem can play Robin again.

    July 15, 2008 at 8:52 am | Report abuse |
  27. Chris


    The Dark Knight was supposed to be the second movie of a trilogy in which at the end of this film he is arrested and the third film he is put on trial and Dent becomes Two-Face. I think the producers of this Batman franchise felt as you did (letting Scarecrow escape), but Heath's untimely death nixed their plan.


    July 15, 2008 at 8:49 am | Report abuse |
  28. CJ

    ANDROLOMA I hope one day, real soon, you feel the pain those poor people who died on 9/11 felt.

    If your intent was to get people upset, mission accomplished. You’re a piece off trash easily forgotten about. If you live in the states please pack your crap and get the hell out.

    To quote one of my favorite songs, slightly adjusted for this ignorant piece of trash.

    Give a room and the boy who made that comment. Four empty hands mine and his. Me and my anger and him and his ignorance and we will just how tough he is.

    July 15, 2008 at 8:32 am | Report abuse |
  29. Tim

    I grew up reading Batman comics, and I never got the feeling of the "darkness" that the first films depicted. Batman Begins was a breath of fresh air into the movies, and I hope I will not be disappointed by The Dark Knight.

    July 15, 2008 at 8:25 am | Report abuse |
  30. Debbie

    Hey Dana-no you are not the only one who feels that way, thank God!

    July 15, 2008 at 8:24 am | Report abuse |
  31. Will


    I've seen no indication that Harvey Dent even becomes Twoface in this film, much less dies. And and as for Batman Begins, only Ras al Ghoul died. Scarecrow remained alive (and I believe even ran free?). And I think if Ledger had had a choice in the matter, he'd probably prefer to be alive to reprise his role.

    Nolan's a brilliant director with an amazing vision. Neither Burton nor Shumacher (with their shoehorned, multiple villains, contrived plots, and misguided sense of place) can honsetly compare.

    July 15, 2008 at 8:11 am | Report abuse |
  32. Robert

    Just to clear up one issue. The co-creator and original artist of Superman, Joe Shuster, modeled the Metropolis skyline after Toronto, Ontario, where he was born and lived. Have a nice day!

    July 15, 2008 at 8:03 am | Report abuse |
  33. Dave

    I just wish these movies wouldnt take the same approach as the Burton and Shumacher films, and kill off major villians after only one movie. Nolan's making the same mistake the other films did by killing off Harvey Dent/Two Face after just one film, and since Ledger's dead, there's no more Joker either. Cant we get a major villain in these movies who actually survives?

    July 15, 2008 at 7:40 am | Report abuse |
  34. hardyhar

    A superior cast with outstanding actors. Everyone of them. Christopher Nolan, gifted, visionary director able to effectively guide the extraordinary cast and develop indelible characters that resonate with fans both new and old.

    While kudos and shout outs to the vision Tim Burton and his cast offered some time ago should not be diminished, a new dawn has arrived and it is my humble opinion that Bale is the best Batman ever, Oldman is an acting God, and Gyllenhaal, Caine and Eckhart never fail to deliver, The character of the Joker must be retired forever as Heath Ledger has delivered the definitive portrayal. I, for one, appreciate his zeal in tackling this character and will mourn the void of the performances he will nver be able to deliver. RIP Heath. You will be missed.

    July 15, 2008 at 7:11 am | Report abuse |
  35. Robert

    Well, considering that Batman of the comics isn't what one would call a "fun" character, I think "depressing" is more on the nose. Batman isn't a whimsical character by any means. He is a dark, brooding, morose character who scares criminals and good guys alike. Personally, I think Batman Begins is leaps and bounds above any of the previous films and I am greatly anticipating this new one. I am a big Heath Ledger fan and cannot wait to see this movie!

    July 15, 2008 at 6:59 am | Report abuse |
  36. Harry

    I pray to the comic gods. Please, please, PLEASE, do NOT reintroduce Robin into the scene ever with the new batman movies. I would rather see Arnold, Uma, and Silverstone take the stage again first(but not by much). The introduction of Robin spelled the absolute DOOM of the last set of batman movies(IE first 2 were good then the rest were horrible).

    I love the new Batman that Bale portrays, and with what I have seen from sneak peak and trailers I will adore this one just as much. Just please keep it dark, nitty gritty, and realistic please.

    July 15, 2008 at 5:59 am | Report abuse |
  37. Greg

    "Why couldn’t they have just continued the mythology from the 'Smallville' series since that has such great characters that everyone knows and loves?"

    Wishful thinking, Star Sailor. Seriously reconsider your personal definition of "everyone", and maybe "loves". As for Burton's "Batman" not aging well: sure, it's no "Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child" (also from 1989). But Keaton and Nicholson are at least as watchable as any movie from that year. It made almost as much money as the top three films from 1990 combined. Granted, box office loot is a poor indicator for actual quality, but "Batman" remains one of the most watchable and accessable movies of the 1980's. It transcends the prevailing film style and pop culture of its time to a degree perhaps only rivaled by the original "Star Wars" movies. And as for "Batman Returns", any and all movies starring Christopher Walken are instantly timeless–any criticism of such films, no matter how correct and negative, can instantly be superceded and dismissed with the statement, "Yeah, but it had Walken." More Cowbell!

    July 15, 2008 at 4:14 am | Report abuse |
  38. Fat Free MIlk

    And Green Lantern's Emerald city is Anaheim, California.

    July 15, 2008 at 4:13 am | Report abuse |
  39. Laya

    Ceasar Romero is and always will be THE one and only Joker!

    July 15, 2008 at 2:05 am | Report abuse |
  40. Michael

    Time Warner should know that the film company created a very disturbing and graphic IMAX preview for this film that's showing in the Far East. The problem: The preview is showing here in Bangkok ahead of 3-D IMAX movies made by National Geographic. The audiences are almost ALL kids, and they're being exposed to guys getting their heads blown off by thugs in clown makeup. My 6-year old daughter was in tears. I am absolutely livid, Time Warner, and I will take my complaints to the rest of the U.S. media about your repulsive ad campaign. You know that previews in the U.S. must be rated for all audiences, but once you get overseas you don't show any responsibility whatsoever. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

    July 15, 2008 at 12:39 am | Report abuse |
  41. Tony

    I'm more familiar with the Marvel side of the business (grew up in the Silver Age) but it seems to me that Batman has undergone a lot of transformations. The Batman of the 50s and 60s seems much less dark, much more "the police department's best buddy", etc. For you Batman fans...when did the Dark Knight movement really begin (I mean, for real?). Seems to me it was in the 80s and 90s. But please, no more Adam "yes, I even have Bat Shark Repellent on my utility belt" West type Batman...I mean, okay Adam, you gave us something to watch but it's time to move on.

    As for Gary Oldham, I agree with those of you who think he's phenomenal. I can't imagine ANYONE doing a better job as a psychotic cop than he did in "Leon" (aka The Professional). Wow.

    July 15, 2008 at 12:35 am | Report abuse |
  42. James


    I think Nicholson's Joker was more of a cartoonish bad guy, much like the 60's show. Ledger's Joker is much more on par with the actual inspiration of Nolan's Batman, the graphic novels a la Miller. Either way, the only Batman movie worth a damn other than Batman Begins thus far, was the original, in my opinion. When all is said and done, the new Batman films are going to go down as THE Batman movies. With supporting actors like Micheal Caine, Gary Oldman, Liam Neeson, and Morgan Freeman, why wouldn't it be?

    July 15, 2008 at 12:00 am | Report abuse |
  43. matt

    Gary Oldman is the best actor you never remember. It's generally because he is so camelion like with his roles that, even without makup or a mask you can't tell it's him. He's probably the most under rated actor of the franchise

    July 14, 2008 at 11:56 pm | Report abuse |
  44. K

    Give you Adam West?! Take him please since that "version" of Batman sucked and had nothing in common with the comics. So you go on ahead and take Adam. Some kids don't require 24 hour glucose drips of entertainment.

    July 14, 2008 at 11:53 pm | Report abuse |
  45. Rob

    Metropolis is most likely the Chicago, close to Supermans Kansas, but modeled after Chicago and Cleveland (where the superman creators are from).

    Gotham is mostly for sure New York, several comics have maps and it looks just like Manhattan.

    Tim Burton is to Comics as trash is to dumpster. Only one outcome was possible.

    Batman is supposed to be depressing by the way. The TV show writers wrecked the story and wasted much of Adam Wests talent.

    July 14, 2008 at 11:47 pm | Report abuse |
  46. alisha

    I think that it is going to be very interesting to see Dark knight and how heath ledger plays the joker, because i think that in the comics the joker was more of a dark villian then a crazy one, so we shall see.

    July 14, 2008 at 10:13 pm | Report abuse |
  47. Desi

    Is this Batman movie actually fun? That last Batman movie was very depressing and boring. I'd really hate to be a kid today and be introduced this mopey excuse for Batman. Give me Adam West any day!!

    July 14, 2008 at 10:07 pm | Report abuse |
  48. Rob

    Well both Jokers may be completley different, like I said I havent seen the film yet but the way that Nicholson played the joker, I thought, was on par with the comic book. An insane psychopathic murderer who would kill ya just as soon as look at ya and did it being silly all the while. Thats why hes called the Joker after all.

    I do hope they bring the Penguin back for the second movie. The joker and the penguin were the only villians that I liked from the Batman comics. Plus I was always more of a Marvel guy when I was a kid.

    July 14, 2008 at 10:00 pm | Report abuse |
  49. chuck

    i have very high hopes for this movie, but kevin conroy is the only true batman, and mark hamill is the best joker ever.

    July 14, 2008 at 9:56 pm | Report abuse |
  50. Addison

    ANDROLOMA July 14th, 2008 3:24 pm ET

    Would make for a more authentic NYC if we could get skyscrapers to fall down again.

    Is this what you do, Androloma? Log onto blogs about fun summer movies in order to make some classless, idiotic, terroristic comment? I certainly hope you don't live in the United States, you don't deserve to. You are an embarrassment.

    July 14, 2008 at 9:50 pm | Report abuse |
  51. PatrickW

    Ok. Gotham is most closely related to New York. But it doesn't matter what city they film it in.
    The CAST in this movie is GREAT..top to bottom. If you are a classic(purist) Batman fan this is the best interpretation so far. Those of use who follow him in his original medium–comics–understand all the variations over time..but some qualities are true–his relentless pursuit of justice that often conflicts with what is consider morally right–batman always considers the collateral damage...the biggest problem with "comic book movies" and even some James Bond flicks is that the innocent are often used as staged dressing..in the comics Batman is worried about the boy on the street getting killed. I think Nolan and Goyer have got a good fomula. The Joker should never come off as fun...he is evil with no sense of reason–the opposite of the Batman. Both are outsiders in their own worlds. Hope the movie is great.

    July 14, 2008 at 9:23 pm | Report abuse |
  52. Jason T

    I haven't been to theatre for over a year. I like most of you look forward to seeing TDK. That said I feel your passion for, an analysis over minute fictional details very creepy. Maybe I will wait for it on video, I am not sure I would want to sit near any of you in public.

    July 14, 2008 at 9:22 pm | Report abuse |
  53. Brian

    Gotham is Chicago! Gotham is New York! Metropolis is New York! No, it's Wichita!

    I've never had so much fun at a nerd fight...keep it up, kids! Uncle Brian's havin' himself a laugh!

    July 14, 2008 at 9:00 pm | Report abuse |
  54. Kent

    I've always seen Gotham as the older, darker, more cavernous NYC; Metropolis, with its open, brighter skies in the comic always fit more in the mode of Chicago. Having burned down 100plus years ago, Chicago became the home of the skyscraper (VERY Metropolis, especially at the time of Superman's growth as a character) and a more positive, open city. Gotham was far more dangerous and dirty, with old towers and alleys that were black as night at noon. MUCH more NYC than Chicago!

    That said, as a transplanted Chicagoan, I'm happy to have them film in town. And as long as Nolan's work continues to make the character grow and as long as he creates films that are compared to the Godfather out of Comic book lore, I'll still be there on opening night!

    July 14, 2008 at 8:44 pm | Report abuse |
  55. Star Sailor

    I don't think Tim Burton's "Batman" and "Batman Returns" has aged well. Although at the time, those films represented a big turning point in the evolution of superhero movies, I think time has withered, what once was brilliant. Thankfully, Nolan has come along to give the scope of the mythology of Batman a more realistic approach not seen in any of the superhero movies thus far. I only wished they could have conquered this for the father of all superheroes, "Superman." "Superman Returns," was such a disappointment! Why couldn't they have just continued the mythology from the "Smallville" series since that has such great characters that everyone knows and loves? Nonetheless, I am totally looking forward to seeing "The Dark Knight" in IMAX this Saturday! 6 scenes shot with IMAX cameras? I am so there!

    July 14, 2008 at 8:39 pm | Report abuse |
  56. janet from Orange co, CA

    Everyone's a critic., pondering literally everything . let's just enjoy the movie.. shall we? What have you written lately?

    July 14, 2008 at 8:37 pm | Report abuse |
  57. Chris

    I love the stuff I hard and have seen.

    Paralleling the Joker with Cagney seems really intuitive.

    The comment on Chicago makes sense, but I'd like to suggest that since Nolan seems to be pushing hyper-realism, perhaps a more tangible city makes sense here.

    July 14, 2008 at 8:13 pm | Report abuse |
  58. TC

    I wonder how many of the Heath Ledger Fans who are praising his portrayal of Joker saw Jack Nickolsan's portrayal? I think Nickolsan should have won an academy award for his Joker. So did he for that matter. It was just such a fun character, and so full of hate and malice and fun. Isn't that what a Joker is suppose to be?

    July 14, 2008 at 8:12 pm | Report abuse |
  59. Observer of Human Nature

    It's just a movie people....get over it!!!!!

    Don't any of you have something in YOUR life to concentrate on.

    I read the article/review and was satisfied. Then I see that people actually post comments on something like this and read the first few posts.....arguing whether Gotham is supposed to be NY or Chicago?!:?!?! You all neeed to get a life.....and I want back the 5 minutes of my life I wasted reading your comments!!!!

    July 14, 2008 at 7:52 pm | Report abuse |
  60. Justin in Reno, NV

    Jack Niholson's Joker is ENTIRELY dfferent from Heath Ledger's. They're way to different to compare.

    July 14, 2008 at 7:42 pm | Report abuse |
  61. Garrett

    Gary Oldman.. best performance in "The 5th Element"... that movie was beyond perfect.

    The chameleon name suits him. To go from 5th element, to harry potter to batman and all other films he has starred or co-starred in, shows he has such a huge bag of tricks in what type of character he can play.. hats off to him and I hope the movie is a hit..

    RIP Heath Ledger.

    July 14, 2008 at 7:42 pm | Report abuse |
  62. Jim in NYC

    Live from the Gotham premiere...

    Well sort of...I was on the M5 bus going up Broadway past the big "Gotham City" premiere of the "Dark Knight", complete with the Bat-Mobile at Lincoln Center. I looked at the crowd waiting and waved to them like I was in the "Pope Mobile". Great for some laughs....

    RLG has it right. Gotham is Noo Yawk...Metropolis, the home of the corn fed Superman, is Chicago "Stacker of Wheat". Muse to Sandberg, home to an infamous and arsonist cow.

    July 14, 2008 at 7:22 pm | Report abuse |
  63. Claude from Ottawa

    I'm looking forward to the Dark Knight, I just wonder now, who will be able to fill in Heath Ledger's shoes in the 3rd movie. Would almost be amazing if they could somehow, recreate his character in CGI along with his voice for the 3rd movie. Would be a heck of an honour for him I would believe.

    July 14, 2008 at 7:21 pm | Report abuse |
  64. Cindy Thomas

    I took my hormonal-life-is-a-drag 14 year old son, who pretended he didn't want to go. We laughed, cheered and I even saw a glisten in his eye. I don't know if the movie will get the "message" across to kids. But for this tired mom, it was 2 hours of reconnecting that is worth every dime I spent on the popcorn and silly cup. Thanks Pixar!

    July 14, 2008 at 6:56 pm | Report abuse |
  65. Jose Rosas

    No one has mentioned the existance of harvey dent in this new movie. By what I've seen in the trailers it looks like we may be seeing the origin of twoface unless they're going to work him into the film as 2nd villain to the Joker. I don't know about anyone else's feelings, but I regret never being able to see Billy Dee Williams as Two Face (he was Harvey Dent in the original 1989 BATMAN). I mean, I like Tommy Lee Jones, but his performance as twoface was horrible. Let's face it, Batman Forever and Batman and Robin were complete garbage.

    Since we're so into the atmosphere and locale of the film, is anyone else grateful that Batman Begins and The Dark Knight aren't these over the top looking fluorescent movies like Batman Forever and Batman and Robin. They looked like Gotham City was an all out rave.

    July 14, 2008 at 6:39 pm | Report abuse |
  66. ksm@osu

    What about Christian Bale as Batman? I got kind of burned out on the Batman franchise when there was a new actor playing Batman in almost every movie. I mean really...Val Kilmer? George Clooney? Come on. I was totally blown away by Christian Bale in "Batman Begins" and here he gets nary a mention. He is very much a chameleon of an actor. I don't know that I would put him in the same category as Gary Oldman, but he is certainly a true actor and could help elevate "The Dark Night" out of the Comic Book Movie genre...

    July 14, 2008 at 6:37 pm | Report abuse |
  67. moses valenzuela

    It's actually Nicholson. As for the Dark Knight, Heath Ledger looks like he could top Nicholson. In Tim Burton's Batman, the Joker was an already established crime boss. In Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight, the Joker is "another" vigilante. Also this film has potential of beating Tim Burton's Batman as the best Batman film ever made.

    As for Gary Oldman he is NEVER given his due. A TRUE method actor. From films like Sid and Nancy, Bram Stoker's Dracula, Leon, True Romance, Hannibal, The Fifth Element, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, and Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. His roles are always memorable!

    July 14, 2008 at 6:37 pm | Report abuse |
  68. Chris

    Have many of you people arguing about Gotham City have ever had girlfriends/boyfriends? Wow.

    July 14, 2008 at 6:35 pm | Report abuse |
  69. Mercedes S

    Aaron Eckhart's "White Knight" is the real surprise of the film... the bright look makes "The Dark Knight" more realistic... Nicholson's Joker was a joke, compared to Ledger's nasty, Oscar-worthy psycho...

    July 14, 2008 at 6:32 pm | Report abuse |
  70. LE

    IT FICTION!! It doesn't matter where Gotham City really is, NYC of Chicago, because there is no Gotham City. It's a comic of a movie there for it's there for our entertainment. IT DOES NOT MATTER!!!!!!

    July 14, 2008 at 6:23 pm | Report abuse |
  71. Gene Van Dyke

    I had the delight of seeing this in IMAX in Chicago yesterday. I was totally blown away. Good point about Gordon. The best Batman stories have been Gordon's stories as well (The Long Halloween, Batman Year One). Oldman brought a rare (for him) simplicity to Jim that I love. And as a resident of Chicago, I can't say I've seen my city put to better use. I prefer this presentation over the quasi-distorted one in Batman Begins.

    July 14, 2008 at 6:19 pm | Report abuse |
  72. JJHart

    We are at war, gas is $4.50 a gallon and two dumb asses are our only hope in the upcoming election and this is what people are concerned with? Whether Gotham is New York or Chicago? Jesus, get me a plane ticket and a moving van.

    July 14, 2008 at 6:10 pm | Report abuse |
  73. Dana

    I'm sorry, but am I the ONLY one horrified by the comment from Androloma? I am speechless.

    July 14, 2008 at 5:56 pm | Report abuse |
  74. JD

    Why is always necessary for CNN to print this

    "It should be noted that “The Dark Knight” is from Warner Bros., which, like CNN, is a unit of Time Warner."

    Who cares??!!??!!??! It is annoying.

    July 14, 2008 at 5:34 pm | Report abuse |
  75. Bryan

    Who cares where it is? Its gonna rock anyway.

    July 14, 2008 at 5:32 pm | Report abuse |
  76. DeathWyrmNexus

    There is something heartening and yet all together sad to read the sheer amount of debate over what Gotham was supposed to be in Kane's mind. I am curious what the argument is actually for at this point. It is a fictious city and isn't on a map and Batman isn't real thus the argument is rather for who is "right" points and without Kane around, that won't happen.

    I did like Nicholson as Joker as it was fun, however I am looking forward to seeing what the late Ledger pulled off by going darker with it.

    July 14, 2008 at 5:32 pm | Report abuse |
  77. Vyyk

    I always wondered what brain-dead would feel like. After reading this diatribe, I think I've got it figured out. Why don't we just leave it as, Gotham is Gotham and Metropolis is Metropolis. The talk in Hollywood is that Ledger might clinch the Oscar posthumously.

    Androloma, that was in extremely poor taste. You should be ashamed of yourself and if you're not, I'm ashamed for your parents.

    July 14, 2008 at 5:18 pm | Report abuse |
  78. Robert

    Nicholson's Joker was a perfect expansion of the Caesar Romero, late 1960's camp version.

    it had no relation to the original Joker, created in the 1930's. by all accounts, Ledger's Joker is closer to the 'true' Joker. as for which city is Gotham...who cares? i think the comment that Chicago is just a more visually stunning city for the Batman movies should say it all. Besides, how many fanboys would have gone up in arms if Batman had used NYC after Spiderman already went there for three movies?

    Chicago just looks better.

    'nuff said.

    July 14, 2008 at 5:14 pm | Report abuse |
  79. Norma Jean

    Heath will be great and I have not seen the movie yet. He was an excellent actor and no doubt he will be awsome. Do you not remember his performance in one of his first roles in The Patriot with Mel Gibson. He was much younger and was absolutely wonderful in that movie. I do see him filling Nicholson's shoes and much much more. I am not a big fan of Nicholson but I do give credit where it is due. Can't wait to see the movie.

    July 14, 2008 at 5:05 pm | Report abuse |
  80. Kip

    hey Laura watch the movie again. Oldman wasn't the police commissioner he was but a mere lieutenant

    July 14, 2008 at 5:03 pm | Report abuse |
  81. Jean

    Gotham, spotham, who cares? it's a comic book, helloooo ... it's a feature film, helloooo. It's all fictitious and that renders this whole discussion moot. Is the film a success at delivering what the public wants – that's the bottom line. Will the die hard fans love it as much as they love the comics and the earlier films? Will it attract new viewers? With Bale, Oldham and Ledger on board to populate this other worls, and Christopher Nolan as director, I suspect the answer is "yes" – for most, that is.

    July 14, 2008 at 4:57 pm | Report abuse |
  82. JB

    The Critics, all of you? You all need to get together a make the perfect movie, one that probadly only your Mon and Dad will go see.

    July 14, 2008 at 4:53 pm | Report abuse |
  83. Justin

    Why's everyone getting up-in-arms about where the freakin film was shot? Seriously, who cares? Obviously New Yorkers and fan-bois stuck with their canonical ideas do (just look at the reviews from the three NY critics, all negative). At least it wasn't done in a sound stage and they were able to get away with more than they would have filming in NY, and it's cheaper too. New Yorkers are like Texans, they're too self-important. And fan-bois need to get a life.

    July 14, 2008 at 4:43 pm | Report abuse |
  84. Rob

    If Wayne Manor was once used in the underground railroad as stated in Batman Begins, then it can't really be Chicago, can it?

    July 14, 2008 at 4:43 pm | Report abuse |
  85. Sercee

    Whatever the history, I've always thought of Metropolis as NYC and Gotham City as Chicago. Doesn't really matter in the end because I'm not exactly a fan of Superman so they'd never collide in my head anyway...

    Regardless of location, Keaton and Bale are both phenomenal batmans. I prefer Bale, but I consider them just two different ways to tell a story. I've never been stuck on keeping exactly with what a comic book says because every time a new person (or medium) tells a story it changes no matter what. But I realllllly can't wait to see Ledger's joker. He's going to kick Jack's butt with his portayal in a big way, I think.

    July 14, 2008 at 4:42 pm | Report abuse |
  86. Nicky

    ANDROLOMA July 14th, 2008 3:24 pm ET

    Would make for a more authentic NYC if we could get skyscrapers to fall down again.

    Real nice......a real class thing to say, I'm assuming your not from NYC and most likely the middle east. You should get cancer and die a slow death.

    July 14, 2008 at 4:37 pm | Report abuse |
  87. Patricia G, Houston, TX

    I have been waiting for this one for some time....I am sure Ledger is great in this from what I have seen...Jack Nicholson is a tough act to follow, but this is another view so I will be open minded. Could care less if it were Chicago of NY or Houston or San Fran...I just want to see the acting and the special effects. But due to all the hype I will wait until the hype dies down a bit. Too much hoopla for now...

    July 14, 2008 at 4:33 pm | Report abuse |
  88. Mat

    Ledger is not supposed to "fill" anyone's shoes. Nicholson was a clown role for a very fake looking and feeling Batman enterprise. Batman Begins and Dark Knight are meant to be "realistic", darker, and truer to the original intent of Batman, namely, a dark vigilante hero with no super powers that fights crime in a dark world -often at odds with local police and residents. The character Ledger created is a dark, psychotic despot on par with Hannibal Lector. It has been said that this movie – despite the hero wearing a cape, is a true crime movie on par with Heat or The Departed. I can't wait.

    July 14, 2008 at 4:33 pm | Report abuse |
  89. Marco

    The city issue can be clarified by following Robin aka Nightwing, rather than the Batguy. Robin graduates to Nightwing and leaves Gotham but stays close by in the neighboring city or sometimes municipality of Gotham, Bludhaven. When Bludhaven is destroyed, Nightwing moves to ... NYC, the former base of the Teen Titans. So, in DC history (or recent history, post 1996) the Cities of Gotham and NYC are separate locations within the same comic book family, the Batfolks.

    Interestingly enough, Bludhaven (spelled with an umlat) was a former whaling town, so we certainly keep Gotham near the NE coast. Boston and environs might not be such a crazy idea after all.

    July 14, 2008 at 4:28 pm | Report abuse |
  90. RLG Virginia

    In the early issues of Detective Comics (1939), Batman operated in New York City. It was changed to "Gotham" a year or so after he was introduced. I always thought Metropolis was Chicago, since Smallville was in Kansas, and Metropolis was the "big city" to Clark the farm boy...

    July 14, 2008 at 3:58 pm | Report abuse |
  91. Ron

    Comic Book History 101: Both Metropolis and Gotham City were always intended to represent a fictional version of New York City (not Chicago, as some are suggesting) for their respective characters to fight crime in. When it became clear that both Batman and Superman co-existed in the same "universe," Metropolis remained as "New York" while Gotham City's location became variable depending on the whim of the writers. More recent comics have very firmly placed GC in New Jersey, very close to Metropolis. Chicago only came into the picture with the more recent Batman movies, which use Chicago rather than New York as their real-world foundation.

    July 14, 2008 at 3:53 pm | Report abuse |
  92. Evan, NJ

    personally, I think Gary Oldman is one of the five best actors alive – along with Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Javier Bardem, Daniel Day-Lewis, and Sir Ian Mckellen. I'd been waiting many years to see the chameleon play a role that wasn't larger-than-life so he could use his incredible talent more subtely – I just never guessed it would come in a batman movie. still, any oldman is good oldman.

    and I agree with one of the earlier comments – I've always thought of him as the man who always looks familiar, but is so amazingly talented at blending into a role and making the viewer forget its not real that you never even realize who it is until you see the credits.

    July 14, 2008 at 3:52 pm | Report abuse |
  93. john

    "For me Nickolsans Joker was right on the mark and those are big shoes to fill." Wow... way to lose all credibility.

    July 14, 2008 at 3:49 pm | Report abuse |
  94. Comic Book Guy

    Actually, in Issue 4 of the original Batman ; Gotham City...

    July 14, 2008 at 3:40 pm | Report abuse |
  95. Muhlz

    My fav is the orignal batman...all the other ones...well lets face it sucked...the last 2 have been great...really fits the comic book version...batman was soposed to be "dark" ...and I think they have been right on point with the new movies. Im so pumped to see this movie

    July 14, 2008 at 3:38 pm | Report abuse |
  96. Dave S.

    I have also heard some theories where Gotham and Metropolis are both based on NYC. One being that Metropolis is lower to midtown Manhattan whereas Gotham is anything above 90th Street. The other theory is that Metropolis is NYC during the day whereas Gotham is NYC at night.

    I personally agree with the Chicago/Detroit theory. As for Metropolis, it's definitely NYC. Although I do find the “Smallville” version interesting which depicts Metropolis is a major metropolitan city in Kansas.

    July 14, 2008 at 3:35 pm | Report abuse |
  97. Kristy M

    Gotham has always reminded me of Chicago...but anyways I'm not worried about what its supposed to look like or where is supposed to be. All I care about is how good it is. I wonder if Ledger can "live" up to the hype that everyone is giving him? Can he fill Nicholson's shoes? Can he blow them away with all that I believe the Joker should be? Can this Batman blow me away like the last one did? I absolutely love Batman, he is by far my favorite character. I loved Keaton, and Bale is doing a damn good job of being the new Wayne. All i can say is opening, night in my area, I will get my ticket and go in expecting to be blow away. I just hope I get what i want.

    July 14, 2008 at 3:28 pm | Report abuse |

    Would make for a more authentic NYC if we could get skyscrapers to fall down again.

    July 14, 2008 at 3:24 pm | Report abuse |
  99. Aaron

    Gotham was ALWAYS the alter ego of Chicago, just as Superman's Metropolis was to New York.

    July 14, 2008 at 3:18 pm | Report abuse |
  100. Michael Sherman

    I totally agree about the locale of the older Tim Burton films. It really created a world that was something unlike anything we can experience. I live in Chicago, and it will really take away from the reality of the film to see it taking place in areas I walk through every day.

    July 14, 2008 at 3:13 pm | Report abuse |
  101. Ed

    Mike, when Batman first appeared in the comics, he fought crime in NYC. The fictitious GC came along only about a year later–about the the time Robin was introduced to lighten things up.

    July 14, 2008 at 3:12 pm | Report abuse |
  102. Eric M

    Marvel sets many of their comics in real-life cities, most famously, Spider-Man lives in NYC.

    In the DC universe (i.e. the old Superfriends gang), the heroes all hail from fictional cities. The concensus is that Metropolis is probably NYC, but the speculation on Gotham is a bit more divided. Some of the more common suggestions I've heard is that Gotham represents Chicago or Detroit.Some of the more interesting theories I've seen include Boston, Baltimore, or Pittsburgh.

    Bottom line is that the city is fictional.

    July 14, 2008 at 3:11 pm | Report abuse |
  103. MEB36

    As a life long Batman fan and aficionado, I eagerly await seeing the IMAX version this coming weekend. I, too, loved Anton Furst's set for the 1989 BATMAN. I remember it once being described in a review as "...if hell erupted and kept clawing skyward..." However, he concept that "Gotham City" is NOT a thinly veiled version of New York City (Manhattan) is false. In agreement with Peter's post that NYC had been known as "Gotham City" long before Bob Kane created Batman, Kane himself is from NYC and chose the name Gotham City for Batman's home turf based upon the urban area he (Kane) knew the best. Comic book locales were traditionally "fictitious" until Marvel began about creating their Universe, based out of...NYC. : )

    July 14, 2008 at 3:07 pm | Report abuse |
  104. Lee

    Yep, peter is correct..
    "Salmagundi; or The Whim-whams and Opinions of Launcelot Langstaff, Esq. & Others, commonly referred to as Salmagundi, was a 19th century satirical periodical created and written by American writer Washington Irving. Written in collaboration with Irving's oldest brother, William, and James Kirke Paulding, Irving produced twenty issues at irregular intervals between January 24, 1807 and January 15, 1808.

    Salmagundi lampooned New York culture and politics in a manner much like today's Mad magazine.[1] It was in the November 11, 1807 issue that Irving first attached the name "Gotham" to New York City.[2]"

    July 14, 2008 at 3:05 pm | Report abuse |
  105. Dave G

    Following up on Mike's comment: in the DC comics universe that birthed Batman, Superman, and many others, Gotham City (despite it's moniker) is the "second city" and a rough analog for Chicago, in the same way that Metropolis roughly represents New York City. So the use of Chicage locales is appropriate, if a bit overly literal.

    July 14, 2008 at 3:04 pm | Report abuse |
  106. Rob

    I know Ill have to see the movie first but all the aclaim that Ledger is getting for the Joker may not live up to my expectations. For me Nickolsans Joker was right on the mark and those are big shoes to fill.

    July 14, 2008 at 2:59 pm | Report abuse |
  107. Travis

    To mike: NYC was first called "Gotham" by Washington Irving in 1807 - long, long before DC created their fictional "Gotham City".

    July 14, 2008 at 2:57 pm | Report abuse |
  108. Thomas

    I was always under the impression that Gotham was supposed to represent Chicago in the first place, against Metropolis as New York. With it's hoods and general gangsterism (the Bob Kane original) and street level violence as opposed to the city of the future that was Metropolis

    July 14, 2008 at 2:56 pm | Report abuse |
  109. Peter

    actually "Gotham City" was a nickname given to NYC long before batman came around...

    July 14, 2008 at 2:47 pm | Report abuse |
  110. mike

    Regarding the statement "calls its locale Gotham City, but... it was largely filmed in Chicago"...what's your point here exactly? Gotham City is a fictitious place. It's any-big-city, USA. It was never supposed to be NYC. So sure, in the new films you see chunks of Chicago amongst the CG'd buildings that were added in, just like in the old ones you'd see pieces of NYC in there. And? Quite frankly, Chicago's real-life architecture is a bit grander than NYC's. So to reiterate, Gotham City is not NYC, nor was it ever supposed to be, despite some New Yorkers giving themselves that title.

    July 14, 2008 at 2:39 pm | Report abuse |
  111. Crispin Kott

    I don't miss Anton Furst. Burton's Gotham City looked like a soundstage.

    July 14, 2008 at 2:35 pm | Report abuse |
  112. Laura

    Gary Oldman was so disguised as the Commisioner in the first Christian Bale batman, I was shocked to learn Gary Oldman was the actor playing Gordon. He's an amazing chameleon! I'm so glad to hear he was utilized more in the most recent batman! I'm eager to see Heath's joker portrayal, it's awesome in the trailers, but as the author observes, the whole cast this time is amazing (because it's not being dragged down by that girl from Dawson's Creek).

    July 14, 2008 at 2:22 pm | Report abuse |

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

About this blog

Our daily cheat-sheet for breaking celebrity news, Hollywood buzz and your pop-culture obsessions.